External vs. endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: has the current view changed?
In past years, external dacryocystorhinostomy has been considered the gold standard in terms of functional outcome for treatment for nasolacrimal duct obstruction. In comparison, interest in the use of the recently developed endonasal dacyocystorhinostomy procedure has been rekindled because of adva...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica 2014-02, Vol.34 (1), p.29-35 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 35 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 29 |
| container_title | Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica |
| container_volume | 34 |
| creator | Savino, G Battendieri, R Traina, S Corbo, G D'Amico, G Gari, M Scarano, E Paludetti, G |
| description | In past years, external dacryocystorhinostomy has been considered the gold standard in terms of functional outcome for treatment for nasolacrimal duct obstruction. In comparison, interest in the use of the recently developed endonasal dacyocystorhinostomy procedure has been rekindled because of advances in instrumentation. For the past 10 years, differences in the outcomes between the two techniques have been reduced; thus, currently, the choice of the type of surgery is associated with the experience of the surgeon, resources available in the healthcare system and patient preferences. |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3970232</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1525768297</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p196t-541c75778803e6d1c396bf2b1caf1caa1c57195da2b6447b617b5551a8daf113</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkF9LwzAUxYMobk6_guTRl0pu2iStD4qM-QcHvuxhbyVNsrXSJjNpp_32BpyiD5fD5R5-53CP0BRyKhIu2PoYTUla0AQIWU_QWQhvhGRC5HCKJjQTADwnU_Sy-OyNt7LF-3CNjdXOyhA3LZUfnRpD73zdWBe1G29wLQPua4PV4L2xPd435gOrWtqt0Xfn6GQj22AuDjpDq4fFav6ULF8fn-f3y2QHBe8TloESLDbJSWq4BpUWvNrQCpTcxJGgmICCaUkrnmWi4iAqxhjIXEcDpDN0-43dDVVntIo9vGzLnW866cfSyab8f7FNXW7dvkwLQWhKI-DqAPDufTChL7smKNO20ho3hBIYZYLntBDRevk36zfk54HpF1Pib4w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1525768297</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>External vs. endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: has the current view changed?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Savino, G ; Battendieri, R ; Traina, S ; Corbo, G ; D'Amico, G ; Gari, M ; Scarano, E ; Paludetti, G</creator><creatorcontrib>Savino, G ; Battendieri, R ; Traina, S ; Corbo, G ; D'Amico, G ; Gari, M ; Scarano, E ; Paludetti, G</creatorcontrib><description>In past years, external dacryocystorhinostomy has been considered the gold standard in terms of functional outcome for treatment for nasolacrimal duct obstruction. In comparison, interest in the use of the recently developed endonasal dacyocystorhinostomy procedure has been rekindled because of advances in instrumentation. For the past 10 years, differences in the outcomes between the two techniques have been reduced; thus, currently, the choice of the type of surgery is associated with the experience of the surgeon, resources available in the healthcare system and patient preferences.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0392-100X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1827-675X</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24711680</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Italy: Pacini Editore SpA</publisher><subject>Dacryocystorhinostomy - methods ; Endoscopy ; Humans ; Nose ; Rhinology</subject><ispartof>Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica, 2014-02, Vol.34 (1), p.29-35</ispartof><rights>Copyright by Società Italiana di Otorinolaringologia e Chirurgia Cervico-Facciale</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3970232/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3970232/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,724,777,781,882,53773,53775</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24711680$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Savino, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Battendieri, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Traina, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corbo, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D'Amico, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gari, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scarano, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paludetti, G</creatorcontrib><title>External vs. endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: has the current view changed?</title><title>Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica</title><addtitle>Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital</addtitle><description>In past years, external dacryocystorhinostomy has been considered the gold standard in terms of functional outcome for treatment for nasolacrimal duct obstruction. In comparison, interest in the use of the recently developed endonasal dacyocystorhinostomy procedure has been rekindled because of advances in instrumentation. For the past 10 years, differences in the outcomes between the two techniques have been reduced; thus, currently, the choice of the type of surgery is associated with the experience of the surgeon, resources available in the healthcare system and patient preferences.</description><subject>Dacryocystorhinostomy - methods</subject><subject>Endoscopy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Nose</subject><subject>Rhinology</subject><issn>0392-100X</issn><issn>1827-675X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkF9LwzAUxYMobk6_guTRl0pu2iStD4qM-QcHvuxhbyVNsrXSJjNpp_32BpyiD5fD5R5-53CP0BRyKhIu2PoYTUla0AQIWU_QWQhvhGRC5HCKJjQTADwnU_Sy-OyNt7LF-3CNjdXOyhA3LZUfnRpD73zdWBe1G29wLQPua4PV4L2xPd435gOrWtqt0Xfn6GQj22AuDjpDq4fFav6ULF8fn-f3y2QHBe8TloESLDbJSWq4BpUWvNrQCpTcxJGgmICCaUkrnmWi4iAqxhjIXEcDpDN0-43dDVVntIo9vGzLnW866cfSyab8f7FNXW7dvkwLQWhKI-DqAPDufTChL7smKNO20ho3hBIYZYLntBDRevk36zfk54HpF1Pib4w</recordid><startdate>201402</startdate><enddate>201402</enddate><creator>Savino, G</creator><creator>Battendieri, R</creator><creator>Traina, S</creator><creator>Corbo, G</creator><creator>D'Amico, G</creator><creator>Gari, M</creator><creator>Scarano, E</creator><creator>Paludetti, G</creator><general>Pacini Editore SpA</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201402</creationdate><title>External vs. endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: has the current view changed?</title><author>Savino, G ; Battendieri, R ; Traina, S ; Corbo, G ; D'Amico, G ; Gari, M ; Scarano, E ; Paludetti, G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p196t-541c75778803e6d1c396bf2b1caf1caa1c57195da2b6447b617b5551a8daf113</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Dacryocystorhinostomy - methods</topic><topic>Endoscopy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Nose</topic><topic>Rhinology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Savino, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Battendieri, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Traina, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corbo, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D'Amico, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gari, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scarano, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paludetti, G</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Savino, G</au><au>Battendieri, R</au><au>Traina, S</au><au>Corbo, G</au><au>D'Amico, G</au><au>Gari, M</au><au>Scarano, E</au><au>Paludetti, G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>External vs. endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: has the current view changed?</atitle><jtitle>Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital</addtitle><date>2014-02</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>29</spage><epage>35</epage><pages>29-35</pages><issn>0392-100X</issn><eissn>1827-675X</eissn><abstract>In past years, external dacryocystorhinostomy has been considered the gold standard in terms of functional outcome for treatment for nasolacrimal duct obstruction. In comparison, interest in the use of the recently developed endonasal dacyocystorhinostomy procedure has been rekindled because of advances in instrumentation. For the past 10 years, differences in the outcomes between the two techniques have been reduced; thus, currently, the choice of the type of surgery is associated with the experience of the surgeon, resources available in the healthcare system and patient preferences.</abstract><cop>Italy</cop><pub>Pacini Editore SpA</pub><pmid>24711680</pmid><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0392-100X |
| ispartof | Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica, 2014-02, Vol.34 (1), p.29-35 |
| issn | 0392-100X 1827-675X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3970232 |
| source | MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central |
| subjects | Dacryocystorhinostomy - methods Endoscopy Humans Nose Rhinology |
| title | External vs. endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: has the current view changed? |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T11%3A07%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=External%20vs.%20endonasal%20dacryocystorhinostomy:%20has%20the%20current%20view%20changed?&rft.jtitle=Acta%20otorhino-laryngologica%20italica&rft.au=Savino,%20G&rft.date=2014-02&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=29&rft.epage=35&rft.pages=29-35&rft.issn=0392-100X&rft.eissn=1827-675X&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1525768297%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1525768297&rft_id=info:pmid/24711680&rfr_iscdi=true |