@article {836861,
	title = {Nasolacrimal recanalization as an alternative to external dacryocystorhinostomy for treating failed nasolacrimal duct intubation.},
	journal = {Medicine (Baltimore)},
	volume = {95},
	number = {30},
	year = {2016},
	month = {2016 Jul},
	pages = {e4350},
	abstract = {To compare the surgical duration and clinical outcomes of nasolacrimal recanalization versus external dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) in the treatment of failed nasolacrimal duct intubation.This is a retrospective, comparative, and interventional study. We evaluated the outcomes of 66 consecutive patients undergoing either nasolacrimal recanalization (n = 32) or DCR (n = 34) in a tertiary lacrimal disease referral center. Length of surgical duration, clinical outcomes, and rate of recurrence at 18 months postoperatively were compared.The mean surgical duration was 18.5 minutes (range, 15-25 minutes) for nasolacrimal recanalization and 48.2 minutes (range, 45-61 minutes) for DCR, respectively (P \&lt; 0.001). The rate of success was 84.4\% in the recanalization group and 85.3\% in the DCR group, respectively (P = 0.91). The time to recurrence was 2.6 {\textpm} 1.1 months in the recanalization group and 5.6 {\textpm} 2.1 months in the DCR group (P \&lt; 0.001). Five failed cases in each group received a secondary DCR surgery with the same resolution rate (40\%). The absence of ocular discharge at baseline was a significant predictor for a successful outcome in the recanalization group (P = 0.04) but not in the DCR group (P = 0.63).Nasolacrimal recanalization is an effective, safe, and time-saving alternative to DCR for the treatment of failed nasolacrimal duct intubation. Clinicians should be cautious in patients with discharge.},
	issn = {1536-5964},
	doi = {10.1097/MD.0000000000004350},
	author = {Hong, Jiaxu and Qian, Tingting and Wei, Anji and Sun, Zhongmou and Wu, Dan and Chen, Yihe and Marmalidou, Anna and Lu, Yi and Sun, Xinghuai and Liu, Zuguo and Amparo, Francisco and Xu, Jianjiang}
}
