ReviewHNO2016
[Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction from an ophthalmologist's point of view : Causes, diagnosis and staged therapeutic concept].
Review in HNO, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Application of CT radiomics in investigating the anatomical basis of chronic dacryocystitis].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2024Article
- Surgical Outcomes in Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction After Probing Failure: A One-Stage Approach.Beyoglu eye journal · 2024Article
- Comparison of Outcomes of Silicone Tube Intubation with or without Dacryoendoscopy for the Treatment of Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Review
- [Minimally invasive diagnostics and therapy of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCongenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO) is one of the most frequent issues in pediatric ophthalmology. There are different therapeutic options, including conservative treatments as well as surgical interventions. These strategies can be classified using a staged therapeutic concept.
objectiveWhat are the therapeutic strategies for CNLDO from an ophthalmologist's point of view?
methodsIn this review, different kinds of CNLDO are described. Existing therapeutic interventions are dedicated to the different forms of CNLDO and summarized in a staged therapeutic concept.
resultsCNLDO is not a homogeneous disease. Different and also combined pathologies exist. According to symptoms and localization of stenosis, different therapeutic interventions are available. The most common CNLDO manifestation is a persistent Hasner's membrane. If conservative approaches have failed, pressurized probing and syringing of the nasolacrimal duct is the method of choice. This can usually be done under local anesthesia. Since some children show persisting symptoms, other therapies (probing and syringing under general anesthesia with nasolacrimal duct intubation, external dacryocystorhinostomy) have to be considered. Here, dacryoendoscopy offers additional diagnostic and therapeutic options.
conclusionThe precise classification of CNLDO and knowledge concerning possible therapeutic interventions are essential. Due to ongoing development of surgical approaches, an increasingly individualized therapy is possible. A gradual therapeutic regimen is available for CNLDO, which has to be adapted individually.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.