Pediatric canalicular laceration repair using the Mini Monoka versus Masterka monocanalicular stent

ABSTRACT Purpose: One of the most important disadvantages of using Mini Monoka stents in pediatric canalicular laceration repair is premature stent loss. In this study, we aimed to compare clinical outcomes between the use of Mini Monoka and Masterka monocanalicular stents in children and discuss the potential causes of premature stent loss. Methods: The medical records of 36 patients who underwent surgical repair of canalicular lacerations were retrospectively reviewed. Children aged <18 years who underwent canalicular laceration repair with either Mini Monoka or Masterka and had at least 6 months of follow-up after stent removal were included in the study. The patients’ demographics, mechanism of injury, type of stent used, premature stent loss, and success rate were analyzed. Success was defined as stent removal without subsequent epiphora and premature stent loss. Results: Twenty-seven children fulfilled our study criteria, and their data were included in the analyses. Mini Monoka was used in 14 patients (51.9%), whereas Masterka was used in 13 patients (48.1%). The preoperative clinical features, including age, sex, and mechanism of injury, were similar between the two groups. The mean age was 8.3 ± 5.5 years in the Mini Monoka group and 7.8 ± 5.9 years in the Masterka group (p=0.61). Three patients in the Mini Monoka group (21.4%) underwent reoperation due to premature stent loss. No premature stent loss was observed in the Masterka group. As a result, the rate of success was 78.6% in the Mini Monoka group, whereas it was 100% in the Masterka group (p=0.22). Conclusions: Even though the two groups did not show any statistically significant difference in success rate, we did not observe any premature stent loss in the Masterka group. Further studies with larger and randomized series are warranted to elaborate on these findings.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mangan,Mehmet Serhat, Turan,Sevil Gul, Ocak,Serap Yurttaser
Format: Digital revista
Language:English
Published: Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia 2022
Online Access:http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27492022005002213
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id oai:scielo:S0004-27492022005002213
record_format ojs
spelling oai:scielo:S0004-274920220050022132022-02-11Pediatric canalicular laceration repair using the Mini Monoka versus Masterka monocanalicular stentMangan,Mehmet SerhatTuran,Sevil GulOcak,Serap Yurttaser Eye injuries Lacrimal apparatus/injuries Nasolacrimal duct Lacerations Stents Microsurgery Intubation/methods Canalicular laceration Child Comparative study ABSTRACT Purpose: One of the most important disadvantages of using Mini Monoka stents in pediatric canalicular laceration repair is premature stent loss. In this study, we aimed to compare clinical outcomes between the use of Mini Monoka and Masterka monocanalicular stents in children and discuss the potential causes of premature stent loss. Methods: The medical records of 36 patients who underwent surgical repair of canalicular lacerations were retrospectively reviewed. Children aged <18 years who underwent canalicular laceration repair with either Mini Monoka or Masterka and had at least 6 months of follow-up after stent removal were included in the study. The patients’ demographics, mechanism of injury, type of stent used, premature stent loss, and success rate were analyzed. Success was defined as stent removal without subsequent epiphora and premature stent loss. Results: Twenty-seven children fulfilled our study criteria, and their data were included in the analyses. Mini Monoka was used in 14 patients (51.9%), whereas Masterka was used in 13 patients (48.1%). The preoperative clinical features, including age, sex, and mechanism of injury, were similar between the two groups. The mean age was 8.3 ± 5.5 years in the Mini Monoka group and 7.8 ± 5.9 years in the Masterka group (p=0.61). Three patients in the Mini Monoka group (21.4%) underwent reoperation due to premature stent loss. No premature stent loss was observed in the Masterka group. As a result, the rate of success was 78.6% in the Mini Monoka group, whereas it was 100% in the Masterka group (p=0.22). Conclusions: Even though the two groups did not show any statistically significant difference in success rate, we did not observe any premature stent loss in the Masterka group. Further studies with larger and randomized series are warranted to elaborate on these findings.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessConselho Brasileiro de OftalmologiaArquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia n.ahead 20222022-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articletext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27492022005002213en10.5935/0004-2749.20220084
institution SCIELO
collection OJS
country Brasil
countrycode BR
component Revista
access En linea
databasecode rev-scielo-br
tag revista
region America del Sur
libraryname SciELO
language English
format Digital
author Mangan,Mehmet Serhat
Turan,Sevil Gul
Ocak,Serap Yurttaser
spellingShingle Mangan,Mehmet Serhat
Turan,Sevil Gul
Ocak,Serap Yurttaser
Pediatric canalicular laceration repair using the Mini Monoka versus Masterka monocanalicular stent
author_facet Mangan,Mehmet Serhat
Turan,Sevil Gul
Ocak,Serap Yurttaser
author_sort Mangan,Mehmet Serhat
title Pediatric canalicular laceration repair using the Mini Monoka versus Masterka monocanalicular stent
title_short Pediatric canalicular laceration repair using the Mini Monoka versus Masterka monocanalicular stent
title_full Pediatric canalicular laceration repair using the Mini Monoka versus Masterka monocanalicular stent
title_fullStr Pediatric canalicular laceration repair using the Mini Monoka versus Masterka monocanalicular stent
title_full_unstemmed Pediatric canalicular laceration repair using the Mini Monoka versus Masterka monocanalicular stent
title_sort pediatric canalicular laceration repair using the mini monoka versus masterka monocanalicular stent
description ABSTRACT Purpose: One of the most important disadvantages of using Mini Monoka stents in pediatric canalicular laceration repair is premature stent loss. In this study, we aimed to compare clinical outcomes between the use of Mini Monoka and Masterka monocanalicular stents in children and discuss the potential causes of premature stent loss. Methods: The medical records of 36 patients who underwent surgical repair of canalicular lacerations were retrospectively reviewed. Children aged <18 years who underwent canalicular laceration repair with either Mini Monoka or Masterka and had at least 6 months of follow-up after stent removal were included in the study. The patients’ demographics, mechanism of injury, type of stent used, premature stent loss, and success rate were analyzed. Success was defined as stent removal without subsequent epiphora and premature stent loss. Results: Twenty-seven children fulfilled our study criteria, and their data were included in the analyses. Mini Monoka was used in 14 patients (51.9%), whereas Masterka was used in 13 patients (48.1%). The preoperative clinical features, including age, sex, and mechanism of injury, were similar between the two groups. The mean age was 8.3 ± 5.5 years in the Mini Monoka group and 7.8 ± 5.9 years in the Masterka group (p=0.61). Three patients in the Mini Monoka group (21.4%) underwent reoperation due to premature stent loss. No premature stent loss was observed in the Masterka group. As a result, the rate of success was 78.6% in the Mini Monoka group, whereas it was 100% in the Masterka group (p=0.22). Conclusions: Even though the two groups did not show any statistically significant difference in success rate, we did not observe any premature stent loss in the Masterka group. Further studies with larger and randomized series are warranted to elaborate on these findings.
publisher Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia
publishDate 2022
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27492022005002213
work_keys_str_mv AT manganmehmetserhat pediatriccanalicularlacerationrepairusingtheminimonokaversusmasterkamonocanalicularstent
AT turansevilgul pediatriccanalicularlacerationrepairusingtheminimonokaversusmasterkamonocanalicularstent
AT ocakserapyurttaser pediatriccanalicularlacerationrepairusingtheminimonokaversusmasterkamonocanalicularstent
_version_ 1756373364067270656