两种泪道扩张器泪道植入治疗鼻泪管阻塞疗效比较  

Therapeutic study of nasolacrimal duct obstruction with two different nasolacrimal duct expanders

作　　者：周坚强[1] 莫百军[1] 王毅[1] 

机构地区：[1]浙江省嘉兴市第一医院眼科,314000

出　　处：《临床眼科杂志》2008年第2期168-170,共3页Journal of Clinical Ophthalmology

基　　金：浙江省科技计划项目基金资助(2003C33010)

摘　　要：目的比较用两种自主设计的泪道扩张器泪道植入联合泪道内注药治疗慢性鼻泪管阻塞的方法和疗效。方法随机选择慢性鼻泪管阻塞或合并慢性泪囊炎患者102例(112只眼)用泪道扩张器泪道植入治疗,并随机分为两组:A组:70只眼,采用自制连线硅胶管泪道扩张器泪道植入;B组:42只眼,采用连线弹性泪道扩张器泪道植入。两组均行上泪点进路植入扩张器留置6周并联合泪道内注入氧氟沙星眼膏的方法进行治疗。结果术后观察:A组3～15个月(平均7.1个月),治愈率为81.43%(57/70),有效率90.00%(63/70);B组3～16个月(平均7.6个月)治愈率为80.95%(34/42),有效率88.10%(37/42)。两组有效率和治愈率分别经两样本率的u检验,P>0.05,差异无显著性。结论应用两种不同泪道扩张器泪道植入的扩张方法治疗鼻泪管阻塞或合并慢性泪囊炎,均能有效扩张泪道,并具有相近的疗效,治疗成功率高,操作简单,损伤轻,是有效的治疗鼻泪管阻塞的非创伤性手术方法。Objective To evaluate the efficacy of the two different nasolacrimal duct expanders to treat the nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Methods 112 eyes （ 102 cases ） with chronic nasolacrimal duct obstruction or with complication of chronic dacryocystitis were divided into two groups ： group A and B. Two different nasolacrimal duct expander were adopted . Group A were treated with self-made silica gel tube nasolacrimal duct expander and Group B with the elastic silica gel expander of patented product. Results After follow-up of 3 ～ 15 months （ mean 7.1 months ）, the cure rate in group A is 81.43% （ 57/70 ） and the effective rate is 90.00 % （ 63/70 ）. After follow-up of 3 ~ 16 months （ mean 7.6 months ） in group B, the cure rate is 80.95% （34/42} and the effective rate is 88.10% （37/42）. Conclusion The two different nasolacrimal duct expanders to treat nasolacrimal duct obstruction have similar effects. They all have mild injury, little pain and high rate of success. They are effective and less traumatic to treat chronic nasolacrimal duct obstruction before performing the dacryocystorhinostomy.

关 键 词：鼻泪管阻塞 慢性泪囊炎 扩张器 

分 类 号：R777.1[医药卫生—眼科]