Raviv Allon1,2, Oded Cohen1,2, Yosef Bavnik1,2, Asher Milstein2,3, Doron Halperin1,2, Meir Warman1,2. 1. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Kaplan Medical Center, Rehovot, Israel. 2. Hadassah Medical School, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Kaplan Medical Center, Rehovot, Israel.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Revision endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (END-DCR) is the preferred approach for failed primary surgeries, yet quality data on long-term outcomes are lacking. This study aimed to evaluate three aspects of revision END-DCR: 5-year success rates, patient satisfaction, and the primary surgical approach's possible impact on revision. METHODS: This retrospective study included all revision END-DCRs conducted at Kaplan Medical Center between the years 2002 and 2015. For long-term follow-up analysis, two subgroups of first and second revision END-DCRs with a minimum of documented 5-year follow-up after surgery were defined. Data were analyzed according to the primary surgical approach. Surgical success was defined by either anatomical (observed patent lacrimal flow) or functional (symptoms cessation) success. Patient satisfaction was measured by a questionnaire. RESULTS: After exclusions, a total of 45 eyes from 38 patients who underwent revision END-DCR surgeries were included in the study. The yearly success rates from immediate to 5 years following the first revision were 93.3%, 75.5%, 71.1%, 68.9%, 68.9%, and 68.9% for the entire cohort, respectively. Immediate and 5-year success rates following the second revision were 88.8% and 77.8%, respectively. Primary END-DCR showed favorable 5-year success rates and patient satisfaction over primary external dacryocystorhinostomy (EXT-DCR) in both first and second revisions, but this did not reach significance. CONCLUSIONS: Revision END-DCR carries an excellent short-term success rate, which decreases mainly throughout the first 2 years following surgery. Postoperative follow-up should be maintained within this timeframe. Revision END-DCR following either primary endoscopic or EXT-DCR produces comparable surgical outcomes and patient-reported satisfaction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b Laryngoscope, 131:E682-E688, 2021.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Revision endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (END-DCR) is the preferred approach for failed primary surgeries, yet quality data on long-term outcomes are lacking. This study aimed to evaluate three aspects of revision END-DCR: 5-year success rates, patient satisfaction, and the primary surgical approach's possible impact on revision. METHODS: This retrospective study included all revision END-DCRs conducted at Kaplan Medical Center between the years 2002 and 2015. For long-term follow-up analysis, two subgroups of first and second revision END-DCRs with a minimum of documented 5-year follow-up after surgery were defined. Data were analyzed according to the primary surgical approach. Surgical success was defined by either anatomical (observed patent lacrimal flow) or functional (symptoms cessation) success. Patient satisfaction was measured by a questionnaire. RESULTS: After exclusions, a total of 45 eyes from 38 patients who underwent revision END-DCR surgeries were included in the study. The yearly success rates from immediate to 5 years following the first revision were 93.3%, 75.5%, 71.1%, 68.9%, 68.9%, and 68.9% for the entire cohort, respectively. Immediate and 5-year success rates following the second revision were 88.8% and 77.8%, respectively. Primary END-DCR showed favorable 5-year success rates and patient satisfaction over primary external dacryocystorhinostomy (EXT-DCR) in both first and second revisions, but this did not reach significance. CONCLUSIONS: Revision END-DCR carries an excellent short-term success rate, which decreases mainly throughout the first 2 years following surgery. Postoperative follow-up should be maintained within this timeframe. Revision END-DCR following either primary endoscopic or EXT-DCR produces comparable surgical outcomes and patient-reported satisfaction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b Laryngoscope, 131:E682-E688, 2021.