Mucosal healing with lacrimal and double mucosal flaps endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy - comparison with flap sacrificed technique: randomised, controlled study.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare two endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy techniques: lacrimal and double nasal mucosal flaps, and endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy without flap preservation.

METHOD

This study was designed as a prospective randomised, controlled trial. Mucosal healing, granulation tissue formation and mucosal scar contracture were investigated after the surgery.

RESULTS

Ninety patients were included in the study (lacrimal and double nasal mucosal flaps, 46; endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy without flap preservation, 44). Nine (18.8 per cent) patients in the endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy without flap preservation group and two patients (4.2 per cent) in the lacrimal and double nasal mucosal flaps group had inadequate wound healing ( 0.025). Granulation tissue formation was detected in nine patients (18.8 per cent) in the endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy without flap preservation group and in 1 patient (2.1 per cent) in the lacrimal and double nasal mucosal flaps group ( 0.008). Functional success rates in the endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy without flap preservation and lacrimal and double nasal mucosal flaps groups were 89.6 per cent and 97.9 per cent, respectively ( 0.092). The operation time was similar in both groups ( 0.122).

CONCLUSION

The double mucosal flaps technique is a surgical procedure with satisfactory outcomes for the repair of mucosal defects and related issues.