DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/issn.2454-5929.ijohns20210689

A comparative study of the results of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with and without stent placement

Shaili S. Shah, Shruti G. Ganvit, Kirti P. Ambani, Ashish U. Katarkar

Abstract


Background: Aim and objectives were to evaluate and compare the outcomes of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) with and without silicone stenting. Surgical success was assessed both subjectively and objectively.  

Methods: A retrospective study was conducted. Total 30 patients with acquired NLD obstruction were enrolled in the study. The patients who underwent the surgery were randomly assigned into two groups: group I: with silicone stent placement, group II: without stent placement. The patients were evaluated in terms of symptoms relief (subjective assessment) and patency of neo-ostium (objective assessment).   

Results: In our study, success rate for patients with placement of stent was 91.66% and without stenting was 77.77%. Statistical data proved that, there was no significant difference between two groups. Endoscopic DCR with stenting had good long term outcome. It maintains patency and prevents re-closer of neo-ostium. With stenting cases cause of failure was synechiae formation and in without stenting cases causes was infection, granulation formation and stoma closer. So both cases had their own merits and demerits.

Conclusions: The endoscopic DCR is minimally invasive and simple procedure. Patient’s discomfort, synechiae, granulations are drawbacks of stenting but stents had given good long term outcome in maintaining patency of neo-ostium. Still data proved, there was no significant difference in both groups. This was due to our small sample size. Regular follow up is necessary for better post-operative outcome and prevention of further complications. So ultimately it is surgeon choice and level of expertise decides use of stent in DCR.  


Keywords


Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy, Nasolacrimal duct obstruction, Silicone stent

Full Text:

PDF

References


Caldwell GW. Two new operations of obstructions of the nasal duct with preservation of the canaliculi & an incidental description of a new lacrimal probe. Am J Opthalmol. 1893;10:189-93.

Mc Donogh M, Meiring JH. Endoscopic transnasal Dacryocystorhinostomy. J Laryngol Otol. 1989;103:585-7.

Okuyucu S, Gorur H, Oksuz H, Akoglu E. Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with silicone, polypropylene, and T‑tube stents; Randomized controlled trial of efficacy and safety. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2015;29:63‑8.

Presutti L. Endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 1995;15:449-53.

Munk PL, Lin DT, Morris DC. Epiphora: Treatment by means of Dacryocystoplasty with balloon dilation of the nasolacrimal drainage apparatus. Radiology 1990;177:687‑90.

Al‑Qahtani AS. Primary endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with or without silicone tubing: A prospective randomized study. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2012;26:332‑4.

Allen K, Berlin AJ. Dacryocystorhinostomy failure; association with nasolacrimal silicone intubation. Opthalmic Surg, 1989;20;486-9.

Vishwakarma R, Singh N, Ghosh R. A study of 272 cases of endoscopic DCR. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;56:259-61.

Cheng SM, Feng YF, Xu L, Li Y, Huang JH. Efficacy of Mitomycin C in Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy: A systemic Review and Meta-Analysis. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(5):e62737.