Nazolakrimal Kanal Tıkanıklığında External Dakriyosistorinostomi: Cerrahi Sonuçların Değerlendirilmesi

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 22 Sayı: 3, 440 - 444, 29.09.2025

Mübeccel Bulut , Ali Hakim Reyhan , Fatma Uyar , Sönmez Çınar , Halime Bolat Çakmak , Oktay Diner

https://doi.org/10.35440/hutfd.1714413

Öz

Amaç: Kliniğimizde external dakriyosistorinostomi uyguladığımız hastaların, bulgu ve sonuçlarını değerlendirmek.
Materyal ve metod: Bu çalışmada hastanemizde Şubat 2024-2025 tarihleri arasında nazolakrimal kanal tıkanıklığı (NLKT) nedeni ile external dakriyosistorinostomi (DSR) uygulanan hastaların dosyaları retros-pektif olarak tarandı. Olguların yaş, cinsiyet gibi demografik verileri kaydedildi. Kliniğimize başvuru bulguları, tıkanıklığın lateralitesi, cerrahi tekniği ve sonuçlar kaydedildi.
Bulgular: Çalışmaya yaş ortalamaları 47.80 olan 59 hasta alındı. %64.4 (38)’ü kadın, %35.6 (21)’sı erkedi. %64.4(38)’ünde sağ, %35.6(21)’sında sol nazolakrimal kanal tıkalıydı. %86.4’ ünde ek oftalmolojik hastalık yoktu. %1.7’sinde glokom, %8.5’inde katarakt, %3.4’ünde makulopati mevcuttu. %88.1’i sadece epifora ile başvururken, %11.9’ u akut dakriyosistit ile başvurmuştu. Cerrahi teknik olarak, %23.7’sine H flep, %76.3’üne U flep uygulanmıştı. %93.29 olgu başarı ile sonuçlanmıştı. Başarının, ek oftalmolojik hastalık, flep tekniği ve başvuru bulguları ile anlamlı bir ilişkisi bulunmadı.(p> 0.05)
Sonuç: External DSR, NLKT ve buna bağlı gelişen dakriyosistit tedavisinde uygulanan etkin bir cerrahidir. Farklı tekniklerle yapılabilir. Uygulanan flep tekniklerinin ve hastanın başvuru bulgularının cerrahi başarı ile ilişkisi bulunmamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

epifora , nlkt , dsr

External Dacryocystorhinostomy for Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction: Evaluation of Surgical Outcomes

Öz

Background: To evaluate the findings and results of patients who underwent external dacryocystorhi-nostomy in our clinic.
Materials and Methods: The files of patients who underwent external dacryocystorhinostomy due to nasolacrimal duct obstruction in our hospital between February 2024 and 2025 were reviewed retro-spectively. Demographic data such as the cases’ age and gender were noted. Findings at presentation to our clinic, laterality of the obstruction, surgical technique, and results were recorded.he study was planned as descriptive cross-sectional. The attitudes of the students studying at the Faculty of medi-cine towards scientific research were questioned. In the study, the ‘’Attitude Scale Towards Scientific Research ‘’ was used.
Results: The study included 59 patients with a mean age of 47.80 years, 64.4% (38) female and 35.6% (21) male. In addition, 64.4% (38) had right nasolacrimal duct obstruction, 35.6% (21) had left na-solacrimal duct obstruction, 86.4% had no additional ophthalmological disease, 1.7% had glaucoma, 8.5% had cataract, and 3.4% had maculopathy. Additionally, 88.1% presented with epiphora only, while 11.9% presented with acute dacryocystitis. Surgical techniques included H flap in 23.7% and U flap in 76.3%, and 93.29% of the cases were successful. No significant relationship was found between success and additional ophthalmological disease, flap technique, or presentation findings (p> 0.05).
Conclusions: External dacryocystorhinostomy is an effective surgical technique applied in the treat-ment of nasolacrimal duct obstruction and associated dacryocystitis. It can be performed with different techniques. No relationship exists between the applied flap techniques and the patient's presentation findings or surgical success.

Anahtar Kelimeler

epiphora , nldo , dcr

Kaynakça

• 1. Ali MJ, Paulsen F. Etiopathogenesis of Primary Acquired Naso-lacrimal Duct Obstruction: What We Know and What We Need to Know. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019; 35(5): 426-433. doi: 10.1097/IOP.0000000000001310.
• 2. Kashkouli MB, Sadeghipour A, Kaghazkanani R, Bayat A, Pakdel F, Aghai GH. Pathogenesis of primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Orbit. 2010; 29(1): 11-5. doi: 10.3109/01676830903207828.
• 3. Garfin SW. Etiology of dacryocystitis and epiphora. Arch Opht-halmol. 1942; 27: 167–88.
• 4. Ali MJ, Schicht M, Paulsen F. Qualitative hormonal profiling of the lacrimal drainage system: potential insights into the etio-pathogenesis of primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruc-tion. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017; 33: 381–8. doi: 10.1097/IOP.0000000000000962.
• 5. Mehta S, Ying GS, Hussain A, Harvey JT. Is gastroesophageal reflux disease associated with primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction?. Orbit. 2018;37: 135–9. doi: 10.1080/01676830.2017.1383456.
• 6. Lee JM, Baek JS. Etiology of epiphora. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2021; 35: 349 54.
• 7. Jin H, Chen X, Ji F, Liu Y, Sheng Y, Wang G, et al. Changes in tear cytokine and lactoferrin levels in postmenopausal women with primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction complica-ted with obstructed meibomian gland dysfunction. BMC Opht-halmol. 2025; 25(1): 29. doi: 10.1186/s12886-025-03866-7.
• 8. Liu S, Zhang H, Zhang YR, Chen LJ, Yu XY. The efficacy of endos-copic dacryocystorhinostomy in the treatment of dacryocystitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2024; 103(11): e37312. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000037312.
• 9. Mukhtar SA, Jamil AZ, Ali Z. Efficacy of external dacryocystorhi-nostomy (DCR) with and without mitomycin-C in chronic dacryocystitis. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2014; 24(10): 732-735. doi: 10.2014/JCPSP.732735.
• 10. Ishio K, Sugasawa M, Tayama N, Kaga K. Clinical usefulness of endoscopic intranasal dacryocystorhinostomy. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl. 2007; (559): 95–102. doi: 10.1080/03655230701597499.
• 11. Katuwal S, Aujla JS, Limbu B, Saiju R, Ruit S. External dacryocys-torhinostomy: do we really need to repair the posterior flap?. Orbit. 2013; 32(2): 102–6. doi: 10.3109/01676830.2013.764451.
• 12. Jones BR. Principles of lacrimal surgery. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK. 1973; 93: 611–8.
• 13. Fuchs E. Textbook of Ophthalmology. Translated by Duane A, 2nd American edition. New York: D Appleton, 1899: 572.
• 14. Schaeffer JP. II. Variations in the anatomy of the nasolachrymal passages. Ann Surg. 1911; 54: 148–52.
• 15. Schaeffer JP. The Nose, Paranasal Sinus, Nasolacrimal Passa-geways and Olfactory Organ in Man. Philadelphia: P.Blakiston’s Son & Co, 1920.
• 16. Baldeschi L, Nardi M, Hintschich CR, Koornneef L. Anterior suspended flaps: a modified approach for external dacryocys-torhinostomy. Br J Ophthalmol. 1998; 82: 790–2. doi: 10.1136/bjo.82.7.790.
• 17. Becker BB. Dacryocystorhinostomy without flaps. Ophthalmic Surg. 1988; 19: 419–27.
• 18. Serin D, Alagöz G, Karsloğlu S, Celebi S, Kükner S. External dacryocystorhinostomy: Double-flap anastomosis or excision of the posterior flaps?. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007; 23(1): 28-31. doi: 10.1097/IOP.0b013e31802dd766.
• 19. Mansour HO, Elzaher Hassan R, Tharwat E, Fekry Elgazzar A, Abd El-Salam ME, Ramadan Ezzeldin, et al. Comparing the success ra-te of external dacryocystorhinostomy with anterior flap versus flap excision in managing chronic dacryocystitis. Med Hypothe-sis Discov Innov Ophthalmol. 2023; 12(1): 1-8. doi: 10.51329/mehdiophthal1464.
• 20. Wu JG, Jiang WH, Yang MS. Analysis the effection of treating neonatal dacryocystitis by probing of lacyimal passage. Chin J Strabismus Pediatr Ophthalmol. 2013; 21: 34–6.
• 21. Freeman, P. David, and Malik Y. Kahook. "Preservatives in topi-cal ophthalmic medications: historical and clinical perspecti-ves." Expert Review of Ophthalmology. 2009; 4(1): 59-64.
• 22. Mandal P. Ahluwalia H. Do topical ocular antihypertensives affect Dacryocystorhinostomy outcomes: The Coventry expe-rience. Eye (Lond). 2022; 36: 135–139. doi: 10.1038/s41433-021-01468-3.
• 23. Inoue K. Managing adverse effects of glaucoma medications. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014;8:903–13. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S44708.
• 24. Seider N, Miller B, Beiran I. Topical glaucoma therapy as a risk factor for nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008;145:120–3. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2007.07.033.