Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Letter
A different forced lavage and soft probing technique in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction
  1. Dilek Yuksel,
  2. Pınar Altiaylik Ozer,
  3. Deniz Acar Basman,
  4. Yusuf Oflu,
  5. Remzi Kasim,
  6. Sunay Duman
  1. Department of Ophthalmology, Ankara Training and Research Hospital, Cebeci, Ankara, Turkey
  1. Correspondence to Dr Dilek Yuksel, Hosdere Cad, Cankaya Evleri, E Blok No 26, Cankaya, Ankara, Turkey; yukseld2000{at}yahoo.com

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

We present a different probing and forced lavage technique in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction.

The authors adhered to the Declaration of Helsinki and all state laws in their country, and the parents of all patients were asked to give consent before being enrolled in the study. This study was approved by the local ethics committee of Ankara Research and Training Hospital, Ministry of Health.

Seventy-seven eyes of 57 patients were included in the study. Patients' ages ranged from 4 to 48 months. For the procedure, 20 G×32 mm or 22 G×25 mm intravenous catheter sheaths and metal probes (0.6 mm or 0.8 mm in diameter) were used (figure 1). For patients under 1 year of age, a 22-gauge catheter sheath was used for the intervention. For patients over 1 year of age, …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • A video is published online only. To view these files please visit the journal online (http://bjo.bmj.com).

  • This study was presented as a poster at the 9th Congress of International Society of Dacryology and Dry Eye (16–18 May 2008) in Istanbul.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Patient consent Obtained.

  • Ethics approval Ethics approval was provided by the local ethics committee of Ankara Research and Training Hospital, Ministry of Health.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.