Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effects of two types of lacrimal stents in the repair of canalicular lacerations.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with canalicular lacerations between January 2017 and December 2022. The canalicular reconstruction was performed using either the Runshi-RS bicanalicular silicone stent or the traditional bicanalicular silicone stent with nasal fixation, under a surgical microscope. The stent was placed for 3 months, and patients were followed up for more than 3 months after extubation. The anatomical and functional success rates were compared between the two groups. Anatomical success was assessed through diagnostic probing and irrigation of lacrimal passage, while functional success was determined by the patient\'s subjective symptoms of epiphora.
RESULTS: The study included 315 patients (315 eyes) undergoing canalicular laceration repair. The Runshi-RS stent was utilized in 147 patients (46.7%), while the traditional stent with nasal fixation was employed in 168 patients (53.3%). The anatomical success rates (99.3% vs 98.8%, P = 0.642) and functional success rates (87.2% vs 88.1%, P = 0.926) were similar between the RS group and the traditional stent group. Postoperative complications were fewer (4.1% vs 10.1%, P = 0.04) and the operation time was shorter (67.1 ± 35.3 min vs 86.1 ± 43.4 min, P < 0.001) in the RS group.
CONCLUSIONS: The Runshi-RS tube demonstrates favorable surgical outcomes for the repair of canalicular lacerations. Compared to the traditional stent with nasal fixation, the RS stent allows for shorter operation times and fewer postoperative complications in the repair of canalicular lacerations.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with canalicular lacerations between January 2017 and December 2022. The canalicular reconstruction was performed using either the Runshi-RS bicanalicular silicone stent or the traditional bicanalicular silicone stent with nasal fixation, under a surgical microscope. The stent was placed for 3 months, and patients were followed up for more than 3 months after extubation. The anatomical and functional success rates were compared between the two groups. Anatomical success was assessed through diagnostic probing and irrigation of lacrimal passage, while functional success was determined by the patient\'s subjective symptoms of epiphora.
RESULTS: The study included 315 patients (315 eyes) undergoing canalicular laceration repair. The Runshi-RS stent was utilized in 147 patients (46.7%), while the traditional stent with nasal fixation was employed in 168 patients (53.3%). The anatomical success rates (99.3% vs 98.8%, P = 0.642) and functional success rates (87.2% vs 88.1%, P = 0.926) were similar between the RS group and the traditional stent group. Postoperative complications were fewer (4.1% vs 10.1%, P = 0.04) and the operation time was shorter (67.1 ± 35.3 min vs 86.1 ± 43.4 min, P < 0.001) in the RS group.
CONCLUSIONS: The Runshi-RS tube demonstrates favorable surgical outcomes for the repair of canalicular lacerations. Compared to the traditional stent with nasal fixation, the RS stent allows for shorter operation times and fewer postoperative complications in the repair of canalicular lacerations.
摘要：
目的：比较两种泪小管支架修复泪小管撕裂的临床效果。
方法：对2017年1月至2022年12月的泪小管撕裂患者进行回顾性分析。使用Runshi-RS双管硅胶支架或带有鼻固定的传统双管硅胶支架进行小管重建，在手术显微镜下.支架放置3个月，术后随访3个月以上。比较两组患者的解剖和功能成功率。通过诊断探查和冲洗泪道来评估解剖成功。而功能的成功是由患者的主观性的溢唇症状决定的。
结果：该研究包括315例（315只眼）接受泪小管裂伤修复的患者。在147例患者中使用了Runshi-RS支架（46.7％），168例(53.3%)患者采用传统的鼻内固定支架。解剖成功率（99.3%vs98.8%，P=0.642）和功能成功率（87.2%vs88.1%，RS组与传统支架组之间P=0.926）相似。术后并发症较少（4.1%vs10.1%，P=0.04），手术时间较短（67.1±35.3分钟vs86.1±43.4分钟，RS组P<0.001)。
结论：Runshi-RS管对泪小管撕裂的修复具有良好的手术效果。与传统的鼻内固定支架相比，RS支架可缩短手术时间,减少泪小管撕裂伤的术后并发症.
方法：对2017年1月至2022年12月的泪小管撕裂患者进行回顾性分析。使用Runshi-RS双管硅胶支架或带有鼻固定的传统双管硅胶支架进行小管重建，在手术显微镜下.支架放置3个月，术后随访3个月以上。比较两组患者的解剖和功能成功率。通过诊断探查和冲洗泪道来评估解剖成功。而功能的成功是由患者的主观性的溢唇症状决定的。
结果：该研究包括315例（315只眼）接受泪小管裂伤修复的患者。在147例患者中使用了Runshi-RS支架（46.7％），168例(53.3%)患者采用传统的鼻内固定支架。解剖成功率（99.3%vs98.8%，P=0.642）和功能成功率（87.2%vs88.1%，RS组与传统支架组之间P=0.926）相似。术后并发症较少（4.1%vs10.1%，P=0.04），手术时间较短（67.1±35.3分钟vs86.1±43.4分钟，RS组P<0.001)。
结论：Runshi-RS管对泪小管撕裂的修复具有良好的手术效果。与传统的鼻内固定支架相比，RS支架可缩短手术时间,减少泪小管撕裂伤的术后并发症.
