ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental pathology2017
Effect of revision dacryocystorhinostomy under nasal endoscopy on recrudescent dacryocystitis.
Article in International journal of clinical and experimental pathology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Osteotomy Techniques in Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy: A Three-Decade Comparative Cohort Study.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePatients with recurrent dacryocystitis are difficult to treat. We aimed to observe the role of dacryocystography in locating the site of obstruction and the effect of revision surgery in these cases of recurrent dacryocystitis.
methodWe prospectively collected patients with recurrent dacryocystitis at West China Hospital of Sichuan University. Dacryocystography was performed before surgery. After revision endoscopy dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR), patients were followed-up regularly. Clinical features were recorded before and after operation, including the visual analog scale (VAS) score. Using the software of SPSS 13.0, VAS scores were compared between preoperation and postoperation by a Student's t test and repeated measure ANOVA.
resultsTwenty patients were collected; eight cases had a history of a one-time occurrence of DCR, and 12 cases had a history of two or more occurrence of DCR. Dacryocystography could show the site with the most lacrimal obstruction. During the operation, we could resect most of the lacrimal sac medial bone wall and expose the sac successfully. Follow-up showed no relapse occurrences and only one case had a slightly tearful eye subjectively but had enough big orificium fistulae and favorable mucosal epithelialization that it was similar to other cases. The VAS scores at follow-up decreased significantly compared with preoperation (P<0.05).
conclusionFor patients with recurrent dacryocystitis, dacryocystography could clarify the cause and exact site of the obstruction and provide information for further treatment. Through revision endoscope DCR, patients can effectively achieve enough drainage of the lacrimal sac accompanied with a significant improvement in symptoms and no observable complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31966532PMC6966050W3028109759What 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.