Endoscopic versus external approach dacryocystorhinostomy: A comparative analysis

Abstract

Background: Dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) consists of creating a lacrimal drainage pathway to the nasal cavity to restore permanent drainage of previously obstructed excreting system. Aim: To compare the result and advantages of both endonasal endoscopic and external DCR regarding the patency rate, patient compliance and complications. Study Design: Prospective non‑randomized comparative study. Materials and Methods: Study was conducted for 16 months duration in a teaching hospital with 50 cases of endoscopic and 30 cases of external DCR with a follow‑up of minimum 6 months. Data regarding surgical outcome and complications were analysed and compared using χ² test. Results: Total 72 patients were included in the study with six having bilateral involvement, out of which 20 were male and 52 were female. The mean age for endoscopic and external DCR was 33.6 years and 46.0 years, respectively. Right eye (63.8%) was involved more commonly than left eye (36.2%). Epiphora was the commonest presenting symptom (63.7%). Mean duration of surgery was much lengthier in external (mean 119.6 minutes) than endoscopic (mean 49.0 minutes) DCR. Bleeding was the most common immediate postoperative complication seen in 33.3% and 10.0% of external and endoscopic DCR cases, respectively. Primary surgical success rate was 90% and 96.7% for endoscopic and external DCR, respectively (P = 0.046). Among the endoscopic DCR group, four patients underwent revision surgery giving a total successful surgical outcome of 98% at third month of follow‑up. However, at 6 month of follow‑up, success rate was 92% for endoscopic DCR and 93.3% for external DCR. The difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.609). Conclusion: Intranasal endoscopic DCR is a simple, minimally invasive, day care procedure and had comparable result with conventional external DCR.

Keywords: Dacryocystorhinostomy, endoscopic, external

Nigerian Medical Journal | Vol. 54 | Issue 3 | May-June | 2013