"The Accessory Ethmoidal Canal Does Not Necessarily Contain an Arterial Structure"

Introduction: The aim of our study is to describe the prevalence of the accessory ethmoidal artery in endonasal endoscopic cadaver dissections and to identify its intraorbital origin. Material and Methods: From 2018 to 2020, thirty-four nasal dissections were performed in seventeen adult cadaveric heads. We performed a complete ethmoidectomy to identify the ethmoidal canals. Then, we removed the bony canal and the lamina papiracea to verify the injected vessel and to confirm the vascular structure inside the canal. Results: We found the anterior ethmoidal canal (AEC) and the posterior ethmoidal canal (PEC) in 100% of nasal cavities (34/34). We identified 4 accessory ethmoidal canals (AcEC) in the 34 nasal fossae dissected (12%). All AEC contained an arterial vessel. The AcEC contained an arterial vascular structure in 2 cases, a neural structure in other specimen, and in the fourth case no structure could be verified. In 32 of 34 nasal cavities, the PEC contained an artery and only in 2 cases the PEC did not contain any vascular structure. In these specimens, we observed that the AcEC with an arterial vessel inside (6%) was closer to the posterior canal than the anterior canal. Conclusion: According to our findings, we can suggest that the presence of a canal does not necessarily imply the presence of an arterial vessel, and that presence of the accessory ethmoidal artery could be associated with the absence of posterior ethmoidal artery

Lacrimal duct Surgery : Different Techniques and Long-Term Postoperative Results

Altres ajuts: acords transformatius de la UABPre-saccal obstructions of the lacrimal duct can be solved with a conjunctivodacryocystorhinostomy while saccal or post-saccal obstructions are restored with an external, endoscopic or laser dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR). The aim of the present study is to review the indications for each technique and to compare the results achieved. Retrospective review of 335 patients in whom 440 surgeries of the lacrimal duct were performed, with at least 4 months of follow-up. Outcomes in terms of symptoms and endoscopic findings during follow-up were considered. Successful results understood as resolution of symptoms were observed in 85% of cases treated with endoscopic DCR and in 62% of cases after laser DCR (p < 0.001). Among patients with recurrence of epiphora after surgery, 32% showed a visible ostium during endoscopy. Sixty-eight conjunctivodacryocystorhinostomies were performed, 68% of which required a tube replacement due to obstruction or extrusion. The mean duration of the tubes replaced was 10 months (range 3 days - 95 months). Endoscopic DCR shows better success rates than laser DCR. A considerable percentage of failures after DCR surgery present a visible ostium on endoscopic examination. This fact should lead to reconsider the initial diagnosis, ruling out functional problems or canalicular obstructions