Comparing Outcomes of the Standard Technique of Endoscopic DCR with Its Modifications: A Retrospective Analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of various techniques of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR).

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case record analysis.

SETTINGS

Tertiary care referral center.

SUBJECT AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of case records was carried out pertaining to the period from January 1996 to September 2017 with respect to patients who had undergone endoscopic DCR with either the standard technique or one of its modifications. Case notes showing well-documented preoperative evaluation, operative details, postoperative assessment, and minimum 6-month follow-up were considered. The outcomes were measured on the basis of patients' postoperative symptoms, clinical examination, and sac-syringing results.

RESULTS

A total of 423 patients were included in the study. Of these, 169 underwent standard endoscopic DCR; 87, endoscopic DCR with stent; 19, endoscopic DCR with mitomycin C; 62, powered DCR; 29, laser-assisted DCR; and 57, balloon DCR. There was no statistically significant difference in success rates, recurrences, or complications of various techniques at 3 or 6 months. Mean operating time was lowest for balloon DCR (mean ± SD, 27.1 ± 3.1 minutes), followed by standard endoscopic DCR (38.2 ± 3.6 minutes; P = .001).

CONCLUSION

Standard endoscopic DCR and its more sophisticated modifications were equally effective and safe in managing distal nasolacrimal drainage obstruction. Balloon DCR, followed by standard endoscopic DCR, was significantly faster than other techniques.