Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with and without mucosal flap—is there any difference?

Abstract

Background

The nasal mucosa is sacrificed in conventional endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomies (EDCRs). Some surgeons, however, modify the technique by elevating a mucosal flap prior to creating the osteotomy with the aim of preserving the mucosa. To our knowledge, no clear-cut benefit of a mucosal flap has been established. The aim of this study is to examine the differences in surgical techniques and success rates of EDCRs with and without mucosal flap preservation.

Methods

We carried out a medical record review of all patients who underwent primary EDCR at the Goldschleger Eye Institute from October 2009 to October 2017. The following data were retrieved from the medical database and analyzed: patient demographics (age at diagnosis and gender), medical history, examination findings, surgical details, postoperative success, complications, and follow-up.

Results

A total of 107 patients who underwent 117 EDCRs participated in the study. Fifty-one patients comprised the group without a mucosal flap and 56 patients comprised the group with mucosal flap preservation. The medical history, presenting complaints, and preoperative examination findings were similar for both groups. The surgical success rate was not significantly different between the groups (82.1% without flap vs. 86.8% with flap, P = 0.478, Chi-square).

Conclusion

The findings of this comparison of EDCRs with and without mucosal flap preservation in a large patient population revealed no differences in surgical success or complications rates between the two procedures and, therefore, no benefit for adding flap preservation to conventional EDCRs.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    Caldwell GW. Two new operations for obstruction of the nasal duct, with preservation of the canaliculi, and with an incidental description of a new lachrymal probe. Am J Ophthalmol. 1893;10:189–93.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Totti A. Nuovo Metodo conservatore dicura radicale delle suppurazione croniche del sacco lacrimale (dacricistorhinostomia). Clin Mod (Firenza). 1904;10:385

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Cukurova I, Bulgurcu S, Arslan IB, Dikilitas B. Comparison of piezosurgery and hammer-chisel in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. J Craniofac Surg. 2018;29:1612–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Selig YK, Biesman BS, Rebeiz EE. Topical application of mitomycin-C in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Am J Rhinol. 2000;14:205–7.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Cokkeser Y, Evereklioglu C, Tercan M, Hepsen IF. Hammer-chisel technique in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2003;112:444–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Ovet G, Sakarya Y, Senturk M. A comparative study of transcanalicular diode laser supported endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy and non-laser endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Am J Otolaryngol. 2016;37:497–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Cokkeser Y, Evereklioglu C, Er H. Comparative external versus endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: results in 115 patients (130 eyes). Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000;123:488–91.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Lin GC, Brook CD, Hatton MP, Metson R. Causes of dacryocystorhinostomy failure: external versus endoscopic approach. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2017;31:181–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Ben Simon GJ, Joseph J, Lee S, Schwarcz RM, McCann JD, Goldberg RA. External versus endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy for acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction in a tertiary referral center. Ophthalmology. 2005;112:1463–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Tsirbas A, Wormald PJ. Endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy with mucosal flaps. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;135:76–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Trimarchi M, Giordano Resti A, Bellini C, Forti M, Bussi M. Anastomosis of nasal mucosal and lacrimal sac flaps in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2009;266:1747–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Codere F, Denton P, Corona J. Endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: a modified technique with preservation of the nasal and lacrimal mucosa. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;26:161–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Marcet MM, Kuk AK, Phelps PO. Evidence-based review of surgical practices in endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy for primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction and other new indications. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2014;25:443–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Zilelioglu G, Tekeli O, Ugurba SH, Akiner M, Akturk T, Anadolu Y. Results of endoscopic endonasal non-laser dacryocystorhinostomy. Doc Ophthalmol. 2002;105:57–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Tsirbas A, Wormald PJ. Mechanical endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy with mucosal flaps. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2006;39:1019–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Green R, Gohil R, Ross P. Mucosal and lacrimal flaps for endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: a systematic review. Clin Otolaryngol. 2017;42:514–20.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Mak ST, Io IY, Wong AC. Prognostic factors for outcome of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy in patients with primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2013;251:1361–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Onerci M, Orhan M, Ogretmenoglu O, Irkec M. Long-term results and reasons for failure of intranasal endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Acta Otolaryngol 2000;120:319–22.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Hodgson N, Bratton E, Whipple K, et al. Outcomes of endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy without mucosal flap preservation. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;30:24–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Ji QS, Zhong JX, Tu YH, Wu WC. New mucosal flap modification for endonasal endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy in Asians. Int J Ophthalmol. 2012;5:704–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Khalifa MA, Ragab SM, Saafan ME, El-Guindy AS. Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with double posteriorly based nasal and lacrimal flaps: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012;147:782–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Kansu L, Aydin E, Avci S, Kal A, Gedik S. Comparison of surgical outcomes of endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy with or without mucosal flaps. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2009;36:555–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ofira Zloto.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zloto, O., Koval, T., Yakirevich, A. et al. Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with and without mucosal flap—is there any difference?. Eye 34, 1449–1453 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-019-0716-4

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links