ArticleInternational archives of otorhinolaryngology2026
Evaluation of the Advantages of Silicone Stent in Revision Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy in a Tertiary Care Hospital.
Article in International archives of otorhinolaryngology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Silicone stents are often employed in dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) procedures to maintain the patency of the newly created tear drainage passage during the healing stage. These stents are flexible, biocompatible, and generally well tolerated by patients. They help prevent adhesion formation and ensure that the surgical opening remains open as the tissue heals. Use of stents in primary DCR is well documented, but their advantages in revision DCR need further exploration. We evaluated the advantages of silicone stents in revision endoscopic DCR performed at a tertiary care hospital. Objective: To compare the surgical success rates of revision endoscopic DCR with and without the use of silicone stents, analyze the incidence of postoperative complications, assess patient satisfaction and quality of life following revision endoscopic DCR using standardized patient questionnaires and evaluate the effectiveness of silicone stents in maintaining ostium patency during the healing process. Methods: The present prospective, interventional, hospital-based study involved 160 patients with nasolacrimal duct obstruction with patent upper and lower canaliculi with symptoms like epiphora, discharge from the eye, swelling in the lacrimal region, hard stop on lacrimal syringing and previous failed endoscopic endonasal DCR and common canalicular obstruction for 2 years. Results: When compared with the non-silicone stent group, the silicone stent group experienced shorter hospital stays, larger anatomical patency, lower recurrence rates, higher satisfaction, and higher success rates. Conclusion: In revision DCR, the use of silicone stents greatly improves surgical results, patient satisfaction, recurrence rates, and hospital stays.
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.