A comparative analysis: Success rates of Endoscopic Endonasal versus External Dacryocystorhinostomy with silicon tube.

Authors

  • Amber Khalid Ziauddin University, Karachi.
  • Quratulain Saleem Ziauddin University, Karachi.
  • Sharjeel Sultan Ziauddin University, Karachi.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29309/TPMJ/2025.32.05.8884

Keywords:

Dacryocystitis, External Dacryocystorhinostomy, Endonasal Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy

Abstract

Introduction:

Dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) is a standard surgical treatment for nasolacrimal duct obstruction. it can be performed via external (E-DCR) or internal (EE-DCR) approaches, with each offering distinct advantages. E- DCR is well-established with high success rates but requires a longer recovery time. EE-DCR, being minimal invasive, Offers a faster recovery and better cosmetic outcomes, though requires longer recovery time. This study compares the anatomical and functional outcomes of EE-DCR and E-DCR with silicon tube.

Setting:

This study was conducted at Ziauddin Hospital, Karachi, over a period of 5 years, from 1st July 2019 to 30th June 2024. Ethical approval was obtained from institutional review board (Ethical approval code: 9330924AKOPT, dated October 28, 2024.)

Material and Methods:

A total of 140 patients were included, divided into two groups of 70 each, EE-DCR and E-DCR. Inclusion criteria were patients aged 18-70 with nasolacrimal duct obstruction and a follow-up of at least one year. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 23, with significance level of p < 0.05. Outcomes such as nasolacrimal duct patency and symptom improvement were assessed during follow-up at 1st day, 1st week, 1st month, 3rd month, 6th month and 1 year.

Results:

The mean age of patients was seen as 42.43 ± 10.9 years in EE-DCR and 49.00 ± 9.01 years in E-DCR group. Anatomical success rates for both groups at 3, 6 and 12 months were comparable, with no statistically significant difference (p-value > 0.05). At 3rf month, 87.14% of the EE-DCR patients and 91.43% of E-DCR patients showed nasolacrimal duct patency. Similarly, functional success rates were assessed showing 84.29% of EE-DCR and 87.14% of E-DCR patients were symptom- free at 3rd month.

Conclusion:

Both EE-DCR and E-DCR are effective treatments for nasolacrimal duct obstruction.EE-DCR offers advantages like faster recovery and fewer complications, while E-DCR remains reliable for complex cases.

Keywords: Dacryocystitis, External Dacryocystorhinostomy, Endonasal Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy

Author Biographies

Amber Khalid, Ziauddin University, Karachi.

FCPS, Assistant Professor Ophthalmology, 

Quratulain Saleem, Ziauddin University, Karachi.

FCPS, Assistant Professor Ophthalmology, 

Sharjeel Sultan, Ziauddin University, Karachi.

FCPS, FRCS, Professor Ophthalmology, 

Downloads

Published

2025-05-01

Issue

Section

Origianl Article