Stent-free Endo-DCR: success of the posterior based mucosal flap technique
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20253614Keywords:
Dacryocystorhinostomy; Endoscopic DCR; Stent-Free; Mucosal Flap; Nasolacrimal Duct ObstructionAbstract
Background: Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy (Endo-DCR) is an established surgical procedure for nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO). While silicone stenting is frequently employed to maintain ostial patency, concerns regarding associated complications and costs have spurred interest in stent-free techniques. This study evaluates the efficacy of the posterior-based mucosal flap technique for stent-free Endo-DCR.
Methods: This prospective observational study was conducted at Nandkumar Singh Chouhan Government Medical College, Khandwa, Madhya Pradesh, between July 2023 and July 2025. One hundred and fifty adult patients (165 eyes) diagnosed with primary acquired NLDO were included after obtaining institutional ethics committee approval and informed consent. All participants underwent stent-free Endo-DCR utilizing the posterior-based mucosal flap technique. Primary outcome measures were anatomical success (patent syringing and endoscopic visualization) and functional success (resolution of epiphora and dacryocystitis) assessed at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months post-operatively. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were also meticulously recorded.
Results: The mean age of the cohort was 51.2±11.8 years (range: 23-82 years), with a female preponderance (72.0% females). The overall anatomical success rate was 87.9% and the functional success rate was 85.5% at 12 months follow-up. Minor postoperative complications, predominantly mild synechiae formation (8.5%), were observed, none of which necessitated surgical revision during the study period. The symptomatic re-obstruction rate requiring revision surgery was 2.4%.
Conclusions: The posterior-based mucosal flap technique for stent-free Endo-DCR demonstrates robust anatomical and functional success rates with a low complication profile in the patient population of Madhya Pradesh. This approach offers a safe, effective and potentially more economical alternative to stented DCR, particularly relevant for improving access to care in resource-constrained regions.
Metrics
References
Linberg JV, McCormick SA. Primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction: A clinicopathologic report and biopsy technique. Ophthalmology. 1986;93(8):1055–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(86)33620-0
Karavellas D, Vasileiou E, Tsinopoulos I. Dacryocystorhinostomy: A review of the literature. J Pan-Arab Assoc Ophthalmol. 2020;24(2):52–58.
Wormald PJ. Powered endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Laryngoscope. 2002;112(12):2200–4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00005537-200201000-00013
Ali MJ, Psaltis AJ, Wormald PJ. Role of silicone intubation in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2013;61(8):441–7.
Park HS, Lee JH, Kim YD. Long-term results of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with and without silicone stenting. Br J Ophthalmol. 2011;95(11):1546–50.
Torkaman A, Keshavarzmanesh M, Kian M. Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with posterior-based mucosal flap. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(4):1146–8.
Aboauf H. Success rate of external dacryocystorhinostomy with and without silicone intubation: A review. Egypt J Otolaryngol. 2024;40(1):1–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.63683
Kang MG, Heo SJ, Ahn HB. A systematic review of the benefit of silicone intubation in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol. 2018;11(2):81–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21053/ceo.2018.00031
Panda BB, Samaddar A, Basak B, Jaiswal R, Mandal S. External versus endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2023;71(3):769–77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/IJO.IJO_3334_22
Pradhan P, Thakur SK, Thapa M, Sinha BK. Double posterior-based flap technique in primary endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017;21(1):42–7.
Locatello LG, Molteni G, Franchi A, Gallo O. A critical update on endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Cancers (Basel). 2024;16(7):1234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14639/0392-100X-N2916
Hamdy HMM, El Guindy A, Naguib N. Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with nasal mucosal flaps: Outcomes and technical refinements. Egypt J Otolaryngol. 2023;39(1):45–52.
Vicinanzo MG, Goldberg RA, Smith TJ. The consequence of premature silicone stent loss after dacryocystorhinostomy. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;24(6):476–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.10.003
Emanuelli E, Borsetto D, Lucidi D, Ciorba A. Posterior lacrimal sac approach technique without stenting: Long-term results. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2013;40(6):558–62.
Chi YC, Lin GC, Wu KC, Chen YL, Lee CH. Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy with short-term intubation: Functional outcomes and resource implications. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022;9:885074. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.946083
Aksoy Y, Sahin S, Yazici Z, Alagoz E, Kaynak S. Functional evaluation of lacrimal drainage system with dacryoscintigraphy and fluorescein dye disappearance test after endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Orbit. 2018;37(5):343–7.
Cuthbertson FM, Webber SK, Rose GE. Assessment of functional nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Eye (Lond). 2004;18(4):400–3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.eye.6700522
Sahlin S, Rose GE. Evaluation of the lacrimal drainage function by the drop test. Am J Ophthalmol. 1996;122(5):701–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9394(14)70490-8
Bahner L, Jentzsch T, Hofmann RJ. Prospective randomized clinical trial on the necessity of silicone stent in endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy. Int J Ophthalmol. 2024;17(2):256–63.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
