Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with and without mucosal flap-is there any difference?
Journal
Eye (London, England)
ISSN: 1476-5454
Titre abrégé: Eye (Lond)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8703986
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2020
08 2020
Historique:
received:
02
08
2019
accepted:
27
09
2019
revised:
16
09
2019
pubmed:
27
11
2019
medline:
22
6
2021
entrez:
27
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
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. 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. 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). 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.
Sections du résumé
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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31767961
doi: 10.1038/s41433-019-0716-4
pii: 10.1038/s41433-019-0716-4
pmc: PMC7468247
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1449-1453Références
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.
Totti A. Nuovo Metodo conservatore dicura radicale delle suppurazione croniche del sacco lacrimale (dacricistorhinostomia). Clin Mod (Firenza). 1904;10:385
Cukurova I, Bulgurcu S, Arslan IB, Dikilitas B. Comparison of piezosurgery and hammer-chisel in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. J Craniofac Surg. 2018;29:1612–3.
doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000004602
Selig YK, Biesman BS, Rebeiz EE. Topical application of mitomycin-C in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Am J Rhinol. 2000;14:205–7.
doi: 10.2500/105065800782102672
Cokkeser Y, Evereklioglu C, Tercan M, Hepsen IF. Hammer-chisel technique in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2003;112:444–9.
doi: 10.1177/000348940311200511
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.
doi: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2016.07.003
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.
doi: 10.1067/mhn.2000.105470
Lin GC, Brook CD, Hatton MP, Metson R. Causes of dacryocystorhinostomy failure: external versus endoscopic approach. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2017;31:181–5.
doi: 10.2500/ajra.2017.31.4425
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.
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.03.015
Tsirbas A, Wormald PJ. Endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy with mucosal flaps. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;135:76–83.
doi: 10.1016/S0002-9394(02)01830-5
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.
doi: 10.1007/s00405-009-1002-z
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.
doi: 10.1097/IOP.0b013e3181b80af6
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.
doi: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000084
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.
doi: 10.1023/A:1015702902769
Tsirbas A, Wormald PJ. Mechanical endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy with mucosal flaps. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2006;39:1019–36.
doi: 10.1016/j.otc.2006.07.007
Green R, Gohil R, Ross P. Mucosal and lacrimal flaps for endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: a systematic review. Clin Otolaryngol. 2017;42:514–20.
doi: 10.1111/coa.12754
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.
doi: 10.1007/s00417-012-2228-9
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.
doi: 10.1080/000164800750001170
Hodgson N, Bratton E, Whipple K, et al. Outcomes of endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy without mucosal flap preservation. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;30:24–27.
doi: 10.1097/IOP.0b013e3182a7502e
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: 23275904
pmcid: 3530812
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.
doi: 10.1177/0194599812447759
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.
doi: 10.1016/j.anl.2009.01.005