Skip to main content
Log in

Association of rhinostomy shape and surgical outcome after endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy

  • Oculoplastics and Orbit
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to investigate surgical outcomes and complications after endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy (EDCR) in relation to rhinostomy shape.

Methods

A retrospective electronic medical record review of patients who underwent EDCR for primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction (PANDO) was performed. Surgical success rates and postoperative complications were compared among three groups of patients in relation to rhinostomy shape (alcove, cavern, or concealed cavern).

Results

A total of 280 patients (358 eyes) were included in the study. Of the 358 eyes, 194 rhinostomies were alcove-shaped, 157 were cavern-shaped, and 7 were concealed cavern-shaped. There were no patients with flat-shaped rhinostomies. The nasal cavity was wider in patients in the alcove group than those in the cavern and concealed cavern groups (p = 0.012). The mean time to tube removal was longest in the concealed cavern group (p = 0.029). There were no significant differences in anatomical success rates among the three groups (p = 0.338). With regard to functional success for patients with anatomically patent DCR, the cavern and concealed cavern groups had significantly poorer results than the alcove group (p = 0.001). Functional success rates were 91.6 %, 84.8 %, and 57.1 % for the alcove, cavern, and concealed cavern groups, respectively. Development of postoperative granuloma was more frequent in the concealed cavern group (85.7 %) than in the alcove (29.3 %) or cavern groups (26.1 %) (p= 0.003). Multiple logistic regression models for surgical outcome showed that rates of functional failure after EDCR were influenced by patient age and rhinostomy shape (odds ratio 1.824, p = 0.045 for age; odds ratio = 9.605, p = 0.000 for rhinostomy shape) (Table 5).

Conclusions

The incidence rate of symptomatic epiphora after EDCR was approximately 12 %, and this result may have been associated with cavernous and concealed rhinostomy shapes. For patients with persistent epiphora and anatomically patent DCR, it is important to identify rhinostomy shape by endoscopy in order to differentiate causes of functional failure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Whittet HB, Shun-Shin GA, Awdry P (1993) Functional endoscopic transnasal dacryocystorhinostomy. Eye 7(Pt 4):545–549

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bartley GB (1994) The pros and cons of laser dacryocystorhinostomy. Am J Ophthalmol 117:103–106

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Allen K, Berlin AJ (1989) Dacryocystorhinostomy failure: association with nasolacrimal silicone intubation. Ophthalmic Surg 20:486–489

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rosen N, Sharir M, Moverman DC, Rosner M (1989) Dacryocystorhinostomy with silicone tubes: evaluation of 253 cases. Ophthalmic Surg 20:115–119

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fayet B, Racy E, Assouline M (2004) Complications of standardized endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy with unciformectomy. Ophthalmology (Elsevier) 111:837–845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ben Simon GJ, Joseph J, Lee S, Schwarcz RM, McCann JD, Goldberg RA (2005) External versus endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy for acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction in a tertiary referral center. Ophthalmology (Elsevier) 112:1463–1468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Tsirbas A, Davis G, Wormald PJ (2004) Mechanical endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy versus external dacryocystorhinostomy. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 20:50–56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sham CL, van Hasselt CA (2000) Endoscopic terminal dacryocystorhinostomy. Laryngoscope (LWW) 110:1045–1049

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Apaydin KC, Fisenk F, Karayalcin B, Akar Y, Saka O (2004) Endoscopic transnasal dacryocystorhinostomy and bicanalicular silicone tube intubation. Ophthalmologica 218:306–311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tabatabaie SZ, Heirati A, Rajabi MT, Kasaee A (2007) Silicone intubation with intraoperative mitomycin C for nasolacrimal duct obstruction in adults: a prospective, randomized, double-masked study. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 23:455–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Selig YK, Biesman BS, Rebeiz EE (2000) Topical application of mitomycin-C in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Am J Rhinol 14:205–207

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Olver J (2002) Colour Atlas of Lacrimal Surgery. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, p 135

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lee MJ, Khwarg SI, Choung HK, Kim N (2014) Associated factors of functional failure of external dacryocystorhinostomy. Can J Ophthalmol 49:40–44

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wu W, Yan W, MacCallum JK, Tu Y, Jiang AC, Yang Y, Xiao T, Li J, Wang Q, Qu J (2009) Primary treatment of acute dacryocystitis by endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with silicone intubation guided by a soft probe. Ophthalmology (Elsevier) 116:116–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Berlucchi M, Castelnuovo P, Vincenzi A, Morra B, Pasquini E (2009) Endoscopic outcomes of resorbable nasal packing after functional endoscopic sinus surgery: a multicenter prospective randomized controlled study. Eur Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngol 266:839–845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Xu G, Chen HX, Wen WP, Shi JB, Li Y (2003) Clinical evaluation of local application of Merogel after endoscopic sinus surgery. Chin J Otorhinolaryngol 38:95–97

    Google Scholar 

  17. Jang SY, Lee KH, Lee SY, Yoon JS (2013) Effects of nasopore packing on dacryocystorhinostomy. Korean J Ophthalmol 27:73–80

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Yazici B, Yazici Z (2003) Final nasolacrimal ostium after external dacryocystorhinostomy. Arch Ophthalmol 121(1):76–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zilelioğlu G, Uğurbaş SH, Anadolu Y, Akiner M, Aktürk T (1998) Adjunctive use of mitomycin C on endoscopic lacrimal surgery. Br J Ophthalmol 82(1):63–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ezra E, Restori M, Mannor GE, Rose GE (1998) Ultrasonic assessment of rhinostomy size following external dacryocystorhinostomy. Br J Ophthalmol 82(7):786–789

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rose GE (2004) The lacrimal paradox: toward a greater understanding of success in lacrimal surgery. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 20:262–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Anderson RL (1977) Gelfoam packing after dacryocystorhinostomy. Arch Ophthalmol 95:520

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Durrani OM, Fernando AI, Reuser TQ (2007) Use of a novel topical hemostatic sealant in lacrimal surgery: a prospective, comparative study. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 23:25–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Weber R, Keerl R, Hochapfel F, Draf W, Toffel PH (2001) Packing in endonasal surgery. Am J Otolaryngol 22:306–320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wang YP, Wang MC, Chen YC, Leu YS, Lin HC, Lee KS (2011) The effects of Vaseline gauze strip, Merocel, and Nasopore on the formation of synechiae and excessive granulation tissue in the middle meatus and the incidence of major postoperative bleeding after endoscopic sinus surgery. J Chin Med Assoc 74:16–21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kim NJ, Kim JH, Hwang SW, Choung HK, Lee YJ, Khwarg SI (2007) Lacrimal silicone intubation for anatomically successful but functionally failed external dacryocystorhinostomy. Korean J Ophthalmol 21:70–73

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Delaney YM, Khooshabeh R (2002) Fluorescein transit test time and symptomatic outcomes after external dacryocystorhinostomy. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 18:281–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding/Support

The authors state that they received no financial support and have no conflicts of interest.

Financial disclosures

We have no financial disclosures. We also uploaded the Modified ICMJE Financial Disclosure Form.

Author contributions are as follows: study concept and design (J.L., H.L., S.Y., M.C., M.P., S.B.); conduct of the study (J.L.,S.Y.,M.C.,M.P.,S.B.); data collection and management (J.L., H.L., S.Y., M.C., S.B.); data analysis (J.L., H.L., S.Y., M.P., S.B.); data interpretation (J.L., H.L., M.C., M.P., S.B.); preparation, review, and approval of the manuscript (J.L., M.C., H.L., M.P., S.B.).

The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Korea University Guro Hospital.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sehyun Baek.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, J., Yang, S.W., Lee, H. et al. Association of rhinostomy shape and surgical outcome after endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 253, 1601–1607 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-2967-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-2967-5

Keywords

Navigation