Success of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with or without stents: systematic review and meta-analysis

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Orsolini, Maria Julia [UNESP]
Data de Publicação: 2019
Outros Autores: Schellini, Silvana Artioli [UNESP], Souza Meneguim, Roberta Lilian Fernandes [UNESP], Catâneo, Antônio José Maria [UNESP]
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01676830.2019.1677726
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/201325
Resumo: Purpose: To evaluate the effect of stents on the success of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR-EN) for treating primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO). Method: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials of DCR-EN for NLDO comparing outcomes of surgeries performed with and without the use of bicanalicular stents and the complications associated with each procedure. Two authors independently searched six databases (Scopus, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science) up to May 2019. Statistical analysis and meta-analysis were performed using RevMan 5.3 software provided by the Cochrane Collaboration. Results: Twelve studies involving 997 surgeries were included in this systematic review. The meta-analysis using a fixed-effects model showed a 94% success rate with stents versus 90.6% without stent. Although stent use favors greater success of DCR-EN, the confidence interval (CI) was wide and very close to nullity line (1.01), decreasing the strength of the recommendation for stent (odds ratio: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.01–2.59, I2 = 0%). Meta-analysis of the adverse effects was not possible. A descriptive analysis was performed of the general complications related to the stents. Conclusions: There is evidence that the use of bicanalicular stents slightly improves the success rate of DCR-EN, but the quality of evidence is low. Future prospective, randomized trials enrolling larger sample sizes may provide stronger evidence to determine whether the stent use influences the success of primary acquired DCR-EN.
id UNSP_50cd5a70e120c84895cf57b0d02e98be
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/201325
network_acronym_str UNSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository_id_str 2946
spelling Success of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with or without stents: systematic review and meta-analysisEndoscopic dacryocystorhinostomymeta-analysisnasolacrimal duct obstructionstentsuccessPurpose: To evaluate the effect of stents on the success of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR-EN) for treating primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO). Method: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials of DCR-EN for NLDO comparing outcomes of surgeries performed with and without the use of bicanalicular stents and the complications associated with each procedure. Two authors independently searched six databases (Scopus, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science) up to May 2019. Statistical analysis and meta-analysis were performed using RevMan 5.3 software provided by the Cochrane Collaboration. Results: Twelve studies involving 997 surgeries were included in this systematic review. The meta-analysis using a fixed-effects model showed a 94% success rate with stents versus 90.6% without stent. Although stent use favors greater success of DCR-EN, the confidence interval (CI) was wide and very close to nullity line (1.01), decreasing the strength of the recommendation for stent (odds ratio: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.01–2.59, I2 = 0%). Meta-analysis of the adverse effects was not possible. A descriptive analysis was performed of the general complications related to the stents. Conclusions: There is evidence that the use of bicanalicular stents slightly improves the success rate of DCR-EN, but the quality of evidence is low. Future prospective, randomized trials enrolling larger sample sizes may provide stronger evidence to determine whether the stent use influences the success of primary acquired DCR-EN.Faculdade de Medicina–Campus de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho (UNESP)Faculdade de Medicina–Campus de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho (UNESP)Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Orsolini, Maria Julia [UNESP]Schellini, Silvana Artioli [UNESP]Souza Meneguim, Roberta Lilian Fernandes [UNESP]Catâneo, Antônio José Maria [UNESP]2020-12-12T02:29:44Z2020-12-12T02:29:44Z2019-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01676830.2019.1677726Orbit (London).1744-51080167-6830http://hdl.handle.net/11449/20132510.1080/01676830.2019.16777262-s2.0-85074907611Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengOrbit (London)info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2021-10-22T17:11:37Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/201325Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462021-10-22T17:11:37Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Success of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with or without stents: systematic review and meta-analysis
title Success of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with or without stents: systematic review and meta-analysis
spellingShingle Success of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with or without stents: systematic review and meta-analysis
Orsolini, Maria Julia [UNESP]
Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy
meta-analysis
nasolacrimal duct obstruction
stent
success
title_short Success of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with or without stents: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Success of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with or without stents: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Success of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with or without stents: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Success of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with or without stents: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort Success of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with or without stents: systematic review and meta-analysis
author Orsolini, Maria Julia [UNESP]
author_facet Orsolini, Maria Julia [UNESP]
Schellini, Silvana Artioli [UNESP]
Souza Meneguim, Roberta Lilian Fernandes [UNESP]
Catâneo, Antônio José Maria [UNESP]
author_role author
author2 Schellini, Silvana Artioli [UNESP]
Souza Meneguim, Roberta Lilian Fernandes [UNESP]
Catâneo, Antônio José Maria [UNESP]
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Orsolini, Maria Julia [UNESP]
Schellini, Silvana Artioli [UNESP]
Souza Meneguim, Roberta Lilian Fernandes [UNESP]
Catâneo, Antônio José Maria [UNESP]
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy
meta-analysis
nasolacrimal duct obstruction
stent
success
topic Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy
meta-analysis
nasolacrimal duct obstruction
stent
success
description Purpose: To evaluate the effect of stents on the success of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR-EN) for treating primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO). Method: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials of DCR-EN for NLDO comparing outcomes of surgeries performed with and without the use of bicanalicular stents and the complications associated with each procedure. Two authors independently searched six databases (Scopus, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science) up to May 2019. Statistical analysis and meta-analysis were performed using RevMan 5.3 software provided by the Cochrane Collaboration. Results: Twelve studies involving 997 surgeries were included in this systematic review. The meta-analysis using a fixed-effects model showed a 94% success rate with stents versus 90.6% without stent. Although stent use favors greater success of DCR-EN, the confidence interval (CI) was wide and very close to nullity line (1.01), decreasing the strength of the recommendation for stent (odds ratio: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.01–2.59, I2 = 0%). Meta-analysis of the adverse effects was not possible. A descriptive analysis was performed of the general complications related to the stents. Conclusions: There is evidence that the use of bicanalicular stents slightly improves the success rate of DCR-EN, but the quality of evidence is low. Future prospective, randomized trials enrolling larger sample sizes may provide stronger evidence to determine whether the stent use influences the success of primary acquired DCR-EN.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-01-01
2020-12-12T02:29:44Z
2020-12-12T02:29:44Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01676830.2019.1677726
Orbit (London).
1744-5108
0167-6830
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/201325
10.1080/01676830.2019.1677726
2-s2.0-85074907611
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01676830.2019.1677726
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/201325
identifier_str_mv Orbit (London).
1744-5108
0167-6830
10.1080/01676830.2019.1677726
2-s2.0-85074907611
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Orbit (London)
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Scopus
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1803047193332940800