Abstract
The man who first suggested a lacrimal probe was thinking along scientific lines. By its use he hoped to remove the obstruction from the nasal duct, and restore its normal function. His disappointment came, however, when he learned, from repeated efforts on patients in whom the probe could be passed through the duct into the nose, that in most instances the tendency to an immediate closure was so great that the hope of draining the sac of its infectious contents had to be abandoned. The failure of the probe to give relief by drainage suggested the use of the style, which proved to be unscientific in principle and unsatisfactory in results. For several years all contributors to this subject seem to have given up the idea of drainage or the restoration of the normal function of the lacrimal sac and nasal duct, and instead have directed their energies to sac
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
