Analysis of the Impact of Surgical Technique on Postoperative Outcomes in Dacryocystorhinostomy

In conclusion, exDCR and enDCR provide high and comparable success rates, whereas tcDCR, despite being less invasive, is associated with significantly lower long-term success.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯

Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to evaluate and compare the surgical outcomes of external (exDCR), endoscopic endonasal (enDCR), and transcanalicular laser dacryocystorhinostomy (tcDCR) in patients with acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction.

📊

Key Findings & Data:In this retrospective study, 130 patients were categorized into three groups: exDCR (n=67), enDCR (n=31), and tcDCR (n=32).

💡

Conclusion & Impact:In conclusion, exDCR and enDCR provide high and comparable success rates, whereas tcDCR, despite being less invasive, is associated with significantly lower long-term success.

🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi

📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample

⚙️Variables:nazolakrimal kanal tıkanıklığı · eksternal DSR · endoskopik DSR

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate and compare the surgical outcomes of external (exDCR), endoscopic endonasal (enDCR), and transcanalicular laser dacryocystorhinostomy (tcDCR) in patients with acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction. In this retrospective study, 130 patients were categorized into three groups: exDCR (n=67), enDCR (n=31), and tcDCR (n=32). Surgical success was defined as resolution of epiphora at the 12-month follow-up, patent lacrimal irrigation, and endoscopic confirmation of a patent rhinostomy. The effects of potential confounding variables, including age, sex, and systemic comorbidity, on surgical outcomes were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Success rates were found to be 89.6% for exDCR, 80.6% for enDCR, and 50.0% for tcDCR. While exDCR and enDCR demonstrated comparable efficacy (p = 0.509), the success rate of tcDCR was significantly lower compared to the other techniques (p = 0.002). In multivariate analysis, surgical technique was identified as the only independent predictor of success, whereas age, sex and systemic comorbidity were not significantly associated with outcomes. In conclusion, exDCR and enDCR provide high and comparable success rates, whereas tcDCR, despite being less invasive, is associated with significantly lower long-term success.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, edinsel nazolakrimal kanal tıkanıklığı olan hastalarda eksternal (exDSR), endoskopik (enDSR) ve transkanaliküler lazer dakriyosistorinostomi (tcDSR)’nin cerrahi sonuçlarının karşılaştırması amaçlanmıştır. Çalışmaya dahil edilen 130 hasta, exDSR (n=67), enDSR (n=31) ve tcDSR (n=32) olmak üzere üç gruba ayrılmıştır. Cerrahi başarı, 12 aylık takip sonunda epiforanın düzelmesi, lavaj ile pasajın açık olması ve endoskopik muayenede rinostominin patent olarak izlenmesi şeklinde tanımlanmıştır. Yaş, cinsiyet ve sistemik komorbidite gibi potansiyel karıştırıcı değişkenlerin cerrahi sonuçlar üzerindeki etkisi çok değişkenli lojistik regresyon analizi ile değerlendirilmiştir. Başarı oranları exDSR için %89,6; enDSR için %80,6 ve tcDSR için %50,0 olarak saptanmıştır. ExDSR ve enDSR sonuçları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark izlenmezken (p = 0,509), tcDSR grubunun başarı oranı diğer gruplara göre anlamlı düzeyde düşük saptanmıştır (p = 0,002). Çok değişkenli analizde, cerrahi teknik başarının bağımsız belirleyicisi olarak saptanmış olup, yaş ve cinsiyetin sonuçlar üzerinde anlamlı bir etkisi izlenmemiştir. Sonuç olarak, exDSR ve enDSR yüksek ve benzer başarı oranları sağlarken, tcDSR daha az invaziv olmasına rağmen anlamlı derecede düşük uzun vadeli başarı ile ilişkilidir.

Keywords

nazolakrimal kanal tıkanıklığı eksternal DSR endoskopik DSR lazer DSR Dakriyosistorinostomi Dacryocystorhinostomy nasolacrimal duct obstruction external DCR endoscopic DCR laser DCR.

🔖

Cite This Article

Bakkal, F. K., Doğruya, S., Aşkın, Z., Topan, Y. E., Tetik, F., Alataş, N. (2026). Analysis of the Impact of Surgical Technique on Postoperative Outcomes in Dacryocystorhinostomy. Osmangazi Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 48 Sayı: 3, 547–554. https://doi.org/10.20515/otd.1851864

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

Open in New Tab ↗

↗New Tab

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (19)

Savino G, Battendieri R, Traina S, Corbo G, D’Amico G, Gari M, et al. External vs. endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: has the current view changed? Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2014;34(1):29–35.
Sobel RK, Aakalu VK, Wladis EJ, Bilyk JR, Yen MT, Mawn LA. A Comparison of Endonasal Dacryocystorhinostomy and External Dacryocystorhinostomy: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology. 2019;126(11):1580–5.
Huang J, Malek J, Chin D, Snidvongs K, Wilcsek G, Tumuluri K, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis on outcomes for endoscopic versus external dacryocystorhinostomy. Orbit. 2014;33(2):81–90.
Malhotra R, Wright M, Olver JM. A consideration of the time taken to do dacryocystorhinostomty (DCR) surgery. Eye. 2003;17(6):691–6.
Güven YZ, Akay F. Primary transcanalicular diode laser-assisted dacryocystorhinostomy: long-term success rates and risk factors for recurrence. Can J Ophthalmol. 2023;58(2):118–24.
Coumou AD, Genders SW, Smid TM, Saeed P. Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: long-term experience and outcomes. Acta Ophthalmol. 2017;95(1):74–8.
Lee MJ, Khwarg SI, Kim IH, Choi JH, Choi YJ, Kim N, et al. Surgical outcomes of external dacryocystorhinostomy and risk factors for functional failure: A 10-year experience. Eye. 2017;31(5):691–7.
Vinciguerra A, Nonis A, Resti AG, Barbieri D, Bussi M, Trimarchi M. Influence of Surgical Techniques on Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Otolaryngol. - Head Neck Surg. 2021;165(1):14–22.
Lee DW, Chai CH, Loon SC. Primary external dacryocystorhinostomy versus primary endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: A review. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2010;38(4):418–26.
Locatello LG, Redolfi De Zan E, Caiazza N, Tarantini A, Lanzetta P, Miani C. A critical update on endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2024;44(6):351–60.
Ozturker C, Purevdorj B, Karabulut GO, Seif G, Fazil K, Khan YA, et al. A Comparison of Transcanalicular, Endonasal, and External Dacryocystorhinostomy in Functional Epiphora: A Minimum Two-Year Follow-Up Study. J Ophthalmol. 2022;2022:3996854.
Gupta SK, Kumar A, Agarwal S, Pandey P. Transcanalicular laser dacryocystorhinostomy using low energy 810 nm diode laser. Oman J Ophthalmol. 2012 Sep;5(3):171–4.
Dogan R, Meric A, Ozsütcü M, Yenigun A. Diode laser-assisted endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: A comparison of three different combinations of adjunctive procedures. Eur Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. 2013;270(8):2255–61.
Akay F, Ilhan A, Yolcu Ü, Gundogan FC, Yildirim Y, Toyran S. Diode laser-assisted transcanalicular dacryocystorhinostomy: The effect of age on the results. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2015;78(3):164–7.
Tooley AA, Klingler KN, Bartley GB, Garrity JA, Woog JJ, Hodge D, et al. Dacryocystorhinostomy for Acquired Nasolacrimal Duct Stenosis in the Elderly (≥80 Years of Age). Ophthalmology. 2017;124(2):263–7.
Çakmak HB, Dİner O. Nazolakrimal Kanal Tıkanıklığında External Dakriyosistorinostomi: Cerrahi Sonuçların Değerlendirilmesi External Dacryocystorhinostomy for Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction: Evaluation of Surgical Outcomes Giriş Materyal ve Metod Bulgular. 2025;22(3):440–4.
Trimarchi M, Giordano Resti A, Vinciguerra A, Danè G, Bussi M. Dacryocystorhinostomy: Evolution of endoscopic techniques after 498 cases. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2020;30(5):998–1003.
Övet G, Sakarya Y, Şentürk M. A comparative study of transcanalicular diode laser supported endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy and non-laser endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Am J Otolaryngol. 2016;37(6):497– 501.
Sousa TTS, Schellini SA, Meneghim RLFS, Cataneo AJM. Intra-Operative Mitomycin-C as Adjuvant Therapy in External and Endonasal Dacryocystorhinostomy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Ophthalmol Ther. 2020 Jun;9(2):305–19.