Comparative External Versus Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy: Results in 115 Patients (130 Eyes)

Çokkeser, Yaşar; Evereklioğlu, Cem; Er, Hamdi̇

doi:10.1067/mhn.2000.105470

Cited by 196 publications

(142 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

124

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar intraoperative complication rate was seen in the study conducted by Cokkeser et al in which intraoperative haemorrhage occured in 15% eyes during external DCR and 15.69% eyes during endonasal DCR. (23) Duwal and Saiju in their study reported intraoperative bleeding in 5.88% patients of endoscopic DCR and 6.45% patients of endoscopic DCR. (18) Our results are comparable to Gauba who reported 18% cases of intraoperative haemorrhage in external DCR and 13% cases of intraoperative haemorrhage in endonasal DCR.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of endonasal endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy over external dacryocy storhinostomy

Goel¹,

Kotwal²,

Gupta³

et al. 2016

IJASHNB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) is an operation indicated for nasolacrimal duct obstruction. It creates a lacrimal drainage pathway into the nasal cavity to facilitate drainage of the previously obstructed excreting system. DCR can be performed either through external or endoscopic approach. We undertook this study to compare the results and advantages of endonasal endoscopic DCR with external DCR with respect to intraoperative and postoperative complications, duration of surgery, functional and cosmetic outcome. Out of 40 patients taken up for DCR, 20 underwent unilateral external DCR, 18 had unilateral endoscopic DCR and 2 had bilateral endoscopic DCR. Thus, a total of 22 eyes underwent endoscopic DCR and it was concluded that endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy is a less time consuming, almost equally effective and aesthetically better then external approach and is an acceptable and functional alternative to external dacryocystorhinostomy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of endonasal endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy over external dacryocy storhinostomy

Goel¹,

Kotwal²,

Gupta³

et al. 2016

IJASHNB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cokkeser et al 3 , comparing DCR EX to DCR EN in 115 patients had success rates of 89.8% and 88.2%, respectively, and recommend the use of endonasal techniques owing to their advantages comparing to the external approach. The success of the endonasal technique in our service was 82.3%, similarly to the results reported in the literature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cokkerser et al 3 , Sham et al 12 , Wormald et al 13 consider that the removal of the whole bone from the sac is associated with better index of success and visualization of opening of common canaliculi, after the removal of the media wall of the sac, which is a good indicator of appropriate saccular exposure 11 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cokkeser et al 3 advocated the use of chisel and hammer because it is a simpler, more hemostatic, cheaper and practical method to make a bone window. Conversely, Wormald et al 11 , Sham et al 12 and Hartikainen et al 2 used drills to cause saccular exposure and ensure that through these instruments there is exposure of the more reliable lacrimal sac, which is ensured by the use of the chisel.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The introduction of microscope and later the endoscopic techniques, associated with the close relation of lacrimal systems and the nasal fossa, have made endonasal surgical treatment of low lacrimal affections very popular among Otorhinolaryngologists 4 . Currently, endoscopic DCR is a well-accepted and established technique in the treatment of obstruction of the lacrimal sac and nasolacrimal duct 1,3,5 and its proficiency by Otorhinolaryngologists has become indispensable.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Dacriocistorrinostomia endoscópica

Filho¹,

Voegels

Butugan

et al. 2005

Rev. Bras. Otorrinolaringol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Endonasal endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (EN-DCR)is now a well-established procedure to relieve nasolacrimal duct obstruction, becoming its domain for the ENT surgeons indispensable. Aim: The aim of the present study is to report the experience of the Otorhinolaryngology Department of the University of São Paulo Medical School in the management of the obstruction of the drainage of the nasolacrimal system by EN-DCR, comparing with the results in literature. Study design: clinical retrospective. Material and Method: We reviewed the medical records of 17 patients (17 eyes) that were submitted to EN-DCR between april 2001 and july 2004. We analysed: sex, age at the time of diagnosis, etiology, clinical findings, surgical technique, use of silicone tubes, follow-up and complications. Results: Eight men and nine women, the age range was from 29 to 79 years (mean 42.6413.1 years), mean follow-up time: 15 months, presented a lacrimal clinic with epiphora. Powered DCR was performed in 06 cases and YAG LASER in 01 patient. Silicone tubes were used in all cases and left in place mean 7.9 weeks. The surgical success rate was 82,3%. Conclusion: EN-DCR showed one safe technique, with advantages in relation to the external technique. So ophthalmologists and ENT physicians must work in harmony to offer more benefits to its patients.

show abstract