Comparative trial on effect of silicone tube removal timing on the result of consequent lacrimal intubation

Abstract

Objective To investigate and compare the clinical effectiveness of different silicone tube removal timing after consequent lacrimal intubation on the treatment of lacrimal duct obstruction. Methods In this retrospective, single-blind, randomized controlled, comparative clinical trial, the patients with lacrimal duct obstruction, including presaccal canalieular obstruction (PSCO) and nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO), were treated by lacrimal duct plasty combined with consequent lacrimal intubation. These patients were randomly divided into two groups by different timing of silicone tube removal: In Group A, silicone tube were removed at 1 month after surgery; In Group B, silicone tube were removed at 3 months after surgery. Effective rates were analyzed at 6 months after tube removal. Results A total of 248 patients (256 eyes) completed follow-up. The total effective rate reached 73.44% (188/256), the effective rates of group A and group B were 67.48% (83/ 123), 78.95% (105/133) respectively (χ2=2.706, P=0.100). The effective rates of PSCO in group A and group B were 64.44% (29/45), 87.76% (43/49) respectively (χ2=7.110, P=0.008), and the effective rates of NLDO in group A and group B were 69.23% (54/78), 73.81% (62/84) respectively (χ2= 0.417, P=0.518). Lacrimal duct inflammation, extubation difficulty were more seen in group B than in group A. Conclusions Consequent lacrimal intubation is an effective and nontraumatizing procedure for the treatment of lacrimal duct obstruction. For patients of PSCO, removal of the silicone tube at 3 months after surgery is more effective than at 1 month. But for patients of NLDO, different timing of silicone tube removal is less likely to affect the final result. Long-term wearing tube may bring more complications. Key words: Lacrimal duct obstruction; Consequent lacrimal intubation; Effective rate; Complication