External Versus Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy Regarding Complications and Outcomes-A Comparative Retrospective Study

Abstract

Aim: To compare external dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) and endoscopic approaches in terms of success rate and complications.
Methods: In this randomized, interventional, comparative study, ninety-four patients (108 surgeries) participated in this study, 58 cases of endoscopic dacrocystorhinostomy and 50 cases of conventional external dacrocystorhinostomy were performed between December 2013 and December 2016 in the Ophthalmology department and in association with the Otorhinolaryngology department in “Diwaniya”teaching hospital in Iraq. All the patients had detailed general medical and ocular history, and they also underwent ocular and ENT examinations to exclude any nasal pathology. The level of blockage was diagnosed by lacrimal syringing and probing. Surgery was done under general anesthesia using a hypotensive technique in all patients, and the surgical outcomes and both intra and postoperative complications were analyzed.
Results: Ninety-four patients (32 males and 62 females; mean age, 56 years) underwent 108 dacrocystorhinostomy surgeries for acquired Nasolacrimal duct obstruction. The success rate associated with the endoscopic procedure was higher than that associated with the external approach [53 (91.4%) versus 41 (82.0%)]; however, the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.148). Moreover, the success rate was even better following revision in both surgical procedures [55 (94.8%) versus 42 (84.0%)] and was much better with endoscopic type and showing a nearly significant value (P=0.064). The odds ratio and 95% confidence interval were 3.49 and (0.87-13.97), respectively, which seems to demonstrate that endoscopic surgery is associated with approximately 3.5 times better successful rate in comparison with open surgery. The patients that wished to perform surgical intervention for the other eye were associated significantly more with the endoscopic procedure compared with the open procedure [54 (93.1%) vs. 40 (69.0%), respectively, (P=0.043), OR=3.38, 95% CI (0.99-11.54)].
Conclusion: The endoscopic approach offered a better operation success rate for acquired Nasolacrimal duct obstruction compared with an external approach.