Evaluation of endoscopic examination and paranasal computed tomography findings in failed dacryocystorhinostomy patients

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate endoscopic and paranasal computed tomography (PNCT) findings in cases of failed dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR).

Methods: This study included 30 cases of failed DCR (18 females, 12 males; mean age: 49.9±18.9 years) and 30 successful DCR patients (20 females, 9 males; mean age: 56.3±15.9 years). The reasons for the recurrence of the disease were evaluated using preoperative endoscopic examination and PNCT findings.

Results: Endoscopic pathology was identified in 24 out of 30 failed cases (80%), while endoscopic pathology was identified in 12 out of 30 successful cases (40%) (p<0.05). PNCT revealed nasal pathology in 24 out of 30 failed cases (80%), and in 15 out of 30 successful cases (50%) (p<0.05).

Conclusion: Endonasal and sinonasal pathologies may be associated with DCR failure. Before the commencement of revision DCR, endoscopic examination and PNCT may provide valuable information regarding the underlying etiology.

Keywords

• Dacryocystorhinostomy,endoscopic examination,failed,nasal endoscopy,paranasal computed tomography (PNCT)

References

1. Ozkaya A, Gurcan Z, Ozusan S. Comparing pimary external dacryocystorhinostomy operations with or without silicone tube intubation. [Article in Turkish]. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Ophthalmology 2007;16:77–81. 2. Caldwell GW. Two new operations for obstruction of the nasal duct. NY Med J 1893;57:581–2. 3. Yakopson VS, Flanagan JC, Ahn D, Luo BP. Dacryocystorhinos- tomy: history, evolution and future directions. Saudi J Ophthalmol 2011;25:37–49. 4. Yigit O, Samanc›o¤lu M, Taskin U, Ceylan S, Eltutar K, Yener M. External and endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy in chronic dacry- ocystitis: comparison of results. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2007; 264:879–85. 5. Rice DH. Endoscopik intranasal dacryocystorhinostomy results in four patients. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1990;116:1061. 6. Metson R, Woog JJ, Puliafito CA. Endoscopik laser dacryocys- torhinostomy. Laryngoscope 1994;104:269–74. 7. Konuk O, Kurtulmusoglu M, Knatova Z, Unal M. Unsuccessful lacrimal surgery: causative factors and results of surgical manage- ment in a tertiary referral center. Ophthalmologica 2010;224:361– 6. 8. Onerci M. Dacryocystorhinostomy. Diagnosis and treatment of nasolacrimal canal obstructions. Rhinology 2002;40:49–65. 9. Karim R, Ghabrial R, Lynch TF, Tang B. A comparison of exter- nal and endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy for acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Clinical Ophthalmology 2011;5: 979–89. 10. Balbaba M, Toplu Y, Ulas F. Association of nasolacrimal canal obstruction and nasal pathologies. [Article in Turkish]. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Ophthalmology 2013;22:5–9. 11. Piédrola Maroto D, Franco Sánchez J, Reyes Eldblom R, Monje Vega E, Conde Jiménez M, Ortiz Rueda M. Endonasal versus trans-canalicular endoscopic dacriocystorhinostomy using diode laser. Surgical techniques and outcomes. [Article in Spanish] Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp 2008;59:283–7. 12. Pittore B, Tan N, Salis G, Brennan PA, Puxeddu R. Endoscopic transnasal dacryocystorhinostomy without stenting: results in 64 consecutive procedures. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2010;30:294– 8. 13. Hart RH, Powrie S, Rose GE. Primary external dacryocystorhi- nostomy. In: Cohen AJ, Mercandetti M, Brazzo BG, editors. The lacrimal system: diagnosis, management and treatment. New York, NY: Springer; 2006. p. 127–43. 14. Welham RA, Wulc AE. Management of unsuccessful lacrimal sur- gery. Br J Ophthalmol 1987;71:152–7. 15. Saratziotis A, Emanuelli E. Osteoma of the medial wall of the max- illary sinus: a primary cause of nasolacrimal duct obstruction and review of the literature. Case Rep Otolaryngol 2014;348459. 16. Lee J, Choi SY, Lee H, Chang M, Park M, Baek S. The clinical effectiveness of transcanalicular diode laser-assisted revision sur- gery for failed endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy. Br J Ophthalmol 2015;99:1130–3. 17. Rose GE. The lacrimal paradox: toward a greater understanding of success in lacrimal surgery. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2014;20: 262–5. 18. Weidenbecher M, Hosemann W, Buhr W. Endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: results in 56 patients. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1994;103:363–7. 19. Onerci M, Orhan M, Ogretmeno¤lu O, ‹rkec M. Long-term results and reasons for failure of intranasal endoscopic dacryocys- torhinostomy. Acta Otolaryngol 2000;120:319–22. 20. Basmak H, Cakl› H, Sahin A, et al. Comparison of endocanalicu- lar laser dacryocystorhinostomy with and without endonasal pro- cedures. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2011;249:737–43. 21. Golan S, Leibovitch I, Landsberg R. Unexpected pathologies in patients referred for endoscopic DCR. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2014;271:3053–8. 22. Ricardo LA, Nakanishi M, Fava AS. Transillumination-guided study of the endoscopic anatomy of the lacrimal fossa. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2010;76:34–9. 23. Aydin S, Acikgoz C, Altin G, Demir MG. Role of nasal and paranasal sinus pathologies in failed external dacryocystorhinosto- my. National Journal of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery 2015;3:4–7. 24. Hurwitz JJ, Edward Kassel EE, Jaffer N. The lacrimal system. In: Hurwitz JJ, editor. Computed tomography and combined CT- dacryocystography (CT-DCG). New York, NY: Raven Press; 1996. p. 83–5.