Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 9, 2026
07:30
Transcanalicular Diode Laser-assisted Dacryocystorhinostomy for the Treatment of Primary Acquired Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction
Published on: October 13, 2017
Endoscopic versus external approach dacryocystorhinostomy: A comparative analysis
Rinki Saha1, Anuradha Sinha, Jyoti Prakash Phukan
1Department of Ophthalmology, Kali Pada Chowdhury Medical College, Kolkata, India.
Summary
Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) offers comparable success rates to external DCR for blocked tear ducts. This minimally invasive approach is a simple, day care procedure with similar outcomes and fewer complications.
Area of Science:
- Ophthalmology
- Otorhinolaryngology
Background:
- Dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) creates a new tear drainage pathway to the nasal cavity for obstructed systems.
- It aims to restore natural tear flow and alleviate symptoms of epiphora.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the outcomes and advantages of endonasal endoscopic DCR versus external DCR.
- Key comparison points include patency rates, patient compliance, and complication profiles.
Main Methods:
- A prospective, non-randomized comparative study was conducted over 16 months.
- The study included 50 endoscopic DCR cases and 30 external DCR cases, with a minimum 6-month follow-up.
- Surgical outcomes and complications were analyzed using the chi-squared test.
Main Results:
- Endoscopic DCR had a shorter mean surgical duration (49.0 min) compared to external DCR (119.6 min).
- Bleeding was more frequent in external DCR (33.3%) than endoscopic DCR (10.0%).
- Initial success rates were 90% for endoscopic and 96.7% for external DCR (P=0.046); at 6 months, success rates were 92% and 93.3% respectively (P=0.609).
Conclusions:
- Intranasal endoscopic DCR is a simple, minimally invasive procedure suitable for day care.
- Endoscopic DCR demonstrated comparable results to conventional external DCR for restoring tear drainage.
