Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-l8wb7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-31T08:35:33.784Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Incision of Hasner's valve under endoscopic intranasal surgery for the treatment of nasolacrimal duct obstruction in children

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2020

C Keilani ,
P Keller  and
J-M Piaton
C Keilani*
Affiliation:
Department IV, Endoscopic Endonasal Surgery and Oculoplastic Division, Quinze-Vingts National Center, Paris, France Faculty of Medicine Pierre and Marie Curie (Paris VI), Sorbonne University, Paris, France Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris, France
P Keller
Affiliation:
Department IV, Endoscopic Endonasal Surgery and Oculoplastic Division, Quinze-Vingts National Center, Paris, France
J-M Piaton
Affiliation:
Department IV, Endoscopic Endonasal Surgery and Oculoplastic Division, Quinze-Vingts National Center, Paris, France
*
Author for correspondence: Dr Chafik Keilani, Department IV, Endoscopic Endonasal Surgery and Oculoplastic Division, Quinze-Vingts National Center, 28 Rue de Charenton, 75571 Paris, France E-mail: dr.chafik.keilani@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of a Hasner's valve incision performed under endoscopic intranasal surgery for the management of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction.

Methods

This retrospective study comprised 484 patients with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction who underwent incision of Hasner's valve under endoscopic intranasal surgery between April 2000 and October 2016. The primary endpoint was the procedure's functional success rate. The secondary endpoints were Hasner's valve and inferior turbinate anatomical findings, demographic data, complication rate and surgical duration.

Results

In patients with no medical history of nasolacrimal duct probing, 91 per cent had a successful result, 5 per cent had a partially successful result, 3.9 per cent showed no change and 0.1 per cent had a worse result following the procedure. Concerning the secondary endpoints, outcomes were more frequently successful in children younger than three years. Only one patient had a post-operative infection. All patients underwent general anaesthesia; no complications related to general anaesthesia were observed. Mean surgical duration was 13.1 ± 5.7 minutes.

Conclusion

Incising Hasner's valve after medially displacing the inferior turbinate under nasal endoscopy seems to be an adequate primary surgical treatment for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction.

Keywords

ChildNasolacrimal DuctTurbinatesLacrimal Duct ObstructionEndoscopy

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 134 , Issue 1 , January 2020 , pp. 56 - 62
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited, 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Dr C Keilani takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

Paul, TO, Shepherd, R. Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: natural history and the timing of optimal intervention. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 1994;31:362–7Google ScholarPubMed
Schnall, BM. Pediatric nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2013;24:421–410.1097/ICU.0b013e3283642e94CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ghuman, T, Gonzales, C, Mazow, ML. Treatment of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Am Orthopt J 1999;49:163–810.1080/0065955X.1999.11982207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, RA, Robb, RM. The natural course of congenital obstruction of the nasolacrimal duct. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 1978;15:246–50Google ScholarPubMed
Nelson, LR, Calhoun, JH, Menduke, H. Medical management of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Ophthalmology 1985;92:1187–9010.1016/S0161-6420(85)33878-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mannor, GE, Rose, GE, Frimpong-Ansah, K, Ezra, E. Factors affecting the success of nasolacrimal duct probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Am J Ophthalmol 1999;127:616–1710.1016/S0002-9394(98)00432-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kushner, BJ. The management of nasolacrimal duct obstruction in children between 18 months and 4 years old. J AAPOS 1998;2:57–6010.1016/S1091-8531(98)90112-4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cifici, F, Akman, A, Sonmez, M, Unal, M, Güngör, A, Yaylali, V. Systematic, combined treatment approach to nasolacrimal duct obstruction in different age groups. Eur J Ophthalmol 2000;10:324–9Google Scholar
Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group, Repka, MX, Chandler, DL, Beck, RW, Crouch, ER 3rd, Donahue, S et al. Primary treatment of nasolacrimal duct obstruction with probing in children less than four years old. Ophthalmology 2008;115:577–84Google Scholar
Engel, JM, Hichie-Schmidt, C, Khammar, A, Ostfeld, BM, Vyas, A, Ticho, BH. Monocanalicular Silastic intubation for the initial correction of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. J AAPOS 2007;11:183–610.1016/j.jaapos.2006.09.009CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tao, S, Meyer, DR, Simon, JW, Zobal-Ratner, J. Success of balloon catheter dilatation as a primary or secondary procedure for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Ophthalmology 2002;109:2108–1110.1016/S0161-6420(02)01216-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wobig, JL. Lacrimal probing complications. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 1985;1:75–610.1097/00002341-198501000-00013CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sener, EC, Onerci, M. Reappraisal of probing of the congenital obstruction of the nasolacrimal system: is nasal endoscopy essential? Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2001;58:65–810.1016/S0165-5876(00)00469-9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cakmak, SS, Yildirim, M, Sakalar, YB, Keklikci, U, Alakus, F. Is it necessary to accompany probing with endoscopy in cases of congenital nasolacrimal canal obstruction? Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2010;74:1013–1510.1016/j.ijporl.2010.05.028CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gioacchini, FM, Alicandri-Ciufelli, M, Kaleci, S, Re, M. The outcomes of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy in children: a systematic review. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2015;79:947–5210.1016/j.ijporl.2015.04.023CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Korkmaz, H, Korkmaz, M, Karakahya, RH, Serhatli, M. Endoscopic intranasal surgery for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction - a new approach. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2013;77:918–2110.1016/j.ijporl.2013.03.005CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Le Garrec, J, Abadie-Koebele, C, Parienti, JJ, Molgat, Y, Degoumois, A, Mouriaux, F. Nasolacrimal duct office probing in children under the age of 12 months: cure rate and cost evaluation. J Fr Ophtalmol 2016;39:171–710.1016/j.jfo.2015.06.009CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andalib, D, Gharabaghi, D, Nabai, R, Abbaszadeh, M. Monocanalicular versus bicanalicular silicone intubation for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. J AAPOS 2010;14:421–410.1016/j.jaapos.2010.08.003CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, PL, Hsiao, CH. Balloon dacryocystoplasty as the primary treatment in older children with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. J AAPOS 2005;9:546–910.1016/j.jaapos.2005.08.002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fayet, B, Hurbli, T, Renard, G, Ruban, JM, Racy, E, Bernard, JA. Suggested precautions when using a monocanalicular stent. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2001;17:76–810.1097/00002341-200101000-00015CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ohtomo, K, Ueta, T, Toyama, T, Nagahara, M. Predisposing factors for primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2013;251:1835–910.1007/s00417-013-2288-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nemet, AY, Vinker, S. Associated morbidity of nasolacrimal duct obstruction–a large community based case-control study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2014;252:125–3010.1007/s00417-013-2484-3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Attarzadeh, A, Sajjadi, M, Owji, N, Reza Talebnejad, M, Farvardin, M, Attarzadeh, A. Inferior turbinate fracture and congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Eur J Ophthalmol 2006;16:520–410.1177/112067210601600403CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Katowitz, JA, Welsh, MG. Timing of initial probing and irrigation in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Ophthalmology 1987;94:698–70510.1016/S0161-6420(87)33392-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rajabi, MT, Inanloo, B, Salabati, M, Rafizadeh, M, Tabatabaie, SZ, Bayat, R et al. The role of inferior turbinate fracture in the management of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 2019;35:269–7110.1097/IOP.0000000000001228CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Havins, WE, Wilkins, RB. A useful alternative to silicone intubation in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstructions. Ophthalmic Surg 1983;14:666–70Google ScholarPubMed
Jones, LT, Wobrig, JL. Congenital anomalies of the lacrimal system. In: Surgery of the Eyelid and Lacrimal System. Birmingham, AL: Aesculapius, 1976;163–7Google Scholar
Wesley, RE. Inferior turbinate fracture in the treatment of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction and congenital nasolacrimal duct anomaly. Ophthalmic Surg 1985;16:368–71Google ScholarPubMed
Kashkouli, MB, Kassaee, A, Tabatabaee, Z. Initial nasolacrimal duct probing in children under age 5: cure rate and factors affecting success. J AAPOS 2002;6:360–310.1067/mpa.2002.129041CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baker, JD. Treatment of congenital nasolacrimal system obstruction. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 1985;22:34–6Google ScholarPubMed