PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcome profile of endonasal laser dacryocystorhinostomy (ENL-DCR) in comparison with external dacryocystorhinostomy (ENL-DCR) carried out as part of general ophthalmic service within the same center. METHODS: Patients who have undergone external or endonasal laser DCR in the authors institute with a minimum follow-up of 9 months and at least 3 months after removal of the tubes were invited to participate in this research. We used a questionnaire and a systematic clinical examination for detecting lacrimal passage patency and function. Patients were classified into categories: complete anatomical and physiological success; anatomical success with partial relief of symptoms; anatomical success with no relief of symptoms; anatomical failure. The endoscopic view of the ostium vertical location has been classified into four levels. RESULTS: One hundred and ten external-DCR and 53 Endonasal-DCR procedures were evaluated. Free communication (anatomical success) was achieved in 82% undergoing Ext-DCR and in 58% undergoing ENL-DCR. A significant number of patients continued to have symptoms in spite of a patent fistula (54% for Ext-DCR and 39% for ENL-DCR). The site of the opening of the internal ostium was significantly related to the persistence of symptoms in spite of free communication (P < 0.001, chi-square test). CONCLUSION: In this series of patients undergoing DCR in a general ophthalmic unit, the standard Ext-DCR technique has a higher anatomical success rate than the endoscopic laser DCR but not necessarily with equivalent rate of relief of symptoms. An inferiorly placed ostium is more likely to result in complete relief of symptoms.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcome profile of endonasal laser dacryocystorhinostomy (ENL-DCR) in comparison with external dacryocystorhinostomy (ENL-DCR) carried out as part of general ophthalmic service within the same center. METHODS:Patients who have undergone external or endonasal laser DCR in the authors institute with a minimum follow-up of 9 months and at least 3 months after removal of the tubes were invited to participate in this research. We used a questionnaire and a systematic clinical examination for detecting lacrimal passage patency and function. Patients were classified into categories: complete anatomical and physiological success; anatomical success with partial relief of symptoms; anatomical success with no relief of symptoms; anatomical failure. The endoscopic view of the ostium vertical location has been classified into four levels. RESULTS: One hundred and ten external-DCR and 53 Endonasal-DCR procedures were evaluated. Free communication (anatomical success) was achieved in 82% undergoing Ext-DCR and in 58% undergoing ENL-DCR. A significant number of patients continued to have symptoms in spite of a patent fistula (54% for Ext-DCR and 39% for ENL-DCR). The site of the opening of the internal ostium was significantly related to the persistence of symptoms in spite of free communication (P < 0.001, chi-square test). CONCLUSION: In this series of patients undergoing DCR in a general ophthalmic unit, the standard Ext-DCR technique has a higher anatomical success rate than the endoscopic laser DCR but not necessarily with equivalent rate of relief of symptoms. An inferiorly placed ostium is more likely to result in complete relief of symptoms.