Aesthetic External DCR: The Subciliary Approach

2014 ◽  
pp. 183-188
Author(s):  
Milind N. Naik
Keyword(s):  
Subciliary Approach ◽  
External Dcr

scholarly journals Combined endoscopic endonasal and subciliary approach in revision DCR cases

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 693
Author(s):  
Manjunatharao S. V. ◽  
Rajshekar M. M.
Keyword(s):  
Team Work ◽  
Tertiary Level ◽  
External Approach ◽  
Combined Approach ◽  
Interventional Study ◽  
Endoscopic Endonasal ◽  
Subciliary Approach ◽  
Endoscopic Dcr ◽  
Surgical Field ◽  
External Dcr

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Study conducted to know surgical outcome of combined endoscopic endonasal and subciliary approach in revision DCR cases and complications associated with the procedure.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> Prospective, single-blinded, randomized, interventional study is carried out in Tertiary level center from August 2009 to April 2016. Totally 18 patients (11 female and 7 male) were involved in the study who has undergone previous DCR (11 external DCR and 7 endoscopic DCR). The results were analyzed at end of the 3<sup>rd</sup> and 6<sup>th</sup> month both subjectively and objectively.  </p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> All the 18 patients who underwent combined approach were relived from epiphora. None of the patients developed any complications following surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> The combination of endoscopic and external approach gives benefits of the both approaches giving huge advantages in revision cases. It gives excellent visualization of the surgical field, ability to correct internal nasal pathologies, make clear rhinostoma, workprecisely on fibrosed lacrimal sac and nearly no external scar. It provides good team work opportunity between otorhinologist and ophthalmologist.</p>

External DCR

Ophthalmology ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 103 (2) ◽  
pp. 200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jouko Hartikainen ◽  
Heikki Seppä ◽  
Reidar Grenman
Keyword(s):  
External Dcr

scholarly journals External dacryocystorhinostomy

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 179-185
Author(s):  
Li Ying Long ◽  
Safinaz Mohd Khialdin ◽  
Nazila Binti Ahmad Azli
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Technique ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
Duct Obstruction ◽  
Posterior Flap ◽  
External Dacryocystorhinostomy ◽  
External Dcr

Aim: To analyse the epidemiological data, surgical technique, success rate, and complications of patients who underwent external DCR in Hospital Selayang from January 2015 to December 2016. Method: Retrospective case series. Results: A total of 21 eyes of 20 patients who underwent external DCR from January 2015 to December 2016 were identified and reviewed. There were 15 females (75%) and 5 males (25%). Age ranged from 5 to 75 years old, with a median age of 56 years old (IQR 23). Twelve patients presented with epiphora while eight patients presented with symptoms of dacryocystitis. One case was congenital, two were secondary nasolacrimal duct obstruction and the rest were primary nasolacrimal duct obstruction. All patients underwent external DCR under general anaesthesia. Silicone tube were inserted in 21 eyes, of which all were removed 3 months after the surgery except one patient whom had his tube dislodged accidentally. The overall success rate was 90.5% (n = 19), which was defined as no or minimal intermittent epiphora or no reflux on lacrimal irrigation at 12 months postoperative. There was one patient who had a cerebrospinal fluid leak treated successfully with intravenous antibiotics. Conclusion: The surgical success rate for external dacryocystorhinostomy was comparable to that of the global success rate of external DCR. This is attributed to the application of surgical technique such as anterior suspended flap modification and posterior flap excision.

Total Excision of an Intraosseous Zygomatic Hemangioma via Subciliary Approach

2010 ◽  
Vol 120 (S3) ◽  
pp. S106-S106
Author(s):  
Linda N. Lee ◽  
Kevin S. Emerick ◽  
William C. Faquin ◽  
David A. Kieff
Keyword(s):  
Total Excision ◽  
Subciliary Approach

Comparison between Endoscopic and External Dacryocystorhinostomy by Using the Lacrimal Symptom Questionnaire: A Pilot Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wai Keat Wong ◽  
Simon Dean ◽  
Salii Nair
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct ◽  
Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction ◽  
Duct Obstruction ◽  
External Group ◽  
Validated Questionnaire ◽  
Endoscopic Group ◽  
External Dcr

Background Epiphora has a significant impact on the patient's quality of life and is commonly caused by nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) has traditionally been performed via an external approach, which involves a skin incision. With the advent of endoscopes, the endonasal approach to DCR has gained significant popularity. Method To prospectively compare the quality of life of adult patients who underwent either an endonasal or an external DCR for acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction, the Lacrimal Symptom Questionnaire (Lac-Q) was administered before and after surgery. The treatment group assignment was nonrandom and performed based on patient preference. The Lac-Q is a validated questionnaire that assesses the subjective perception of one's well-being from an eye-specific symptom and social impact standpoint. Total scores range from 0 (no concerns) to 33 (maximal degree of ocular symptoms and social impact). Results Sixty patients (22 in the endonasal group, 38 in the external group) were recruited between January 1, 2014, and January 1, 2016. Postoperative assessment was performed at 3 and 6 months. Patients who underwent external DCR reported a median 7.0–point improvement (interquartile range [IQR], 3.0–11.0) in total Lac-Q scores. A 12.0–point improvement (IQR, 10.0–18.5) was seen in the endonasal group (p = 0.005). The median change in the social impact score was 3.0 and 4.0 in the external group and the endoscopic group, respectively (p = 0.029). Changes in the median lacrimal symptom score were 4.0 in the external group and 8.0 in the endoscopic group (p = 0.014). The anatomic patency rate was lower in the external group (60.0%) when compared with the endonasal group (90.4%). Patients in the external DCR group were significantly older (median age, 51 versus 41 years). Conclusion Our study indicated that both endonasal and external DCR can lead to improvement in quality of life by using a validated questionnaire. Although there are differences in age and anatomic success rates between the two groups, subgroup analyses indicated that the differences in the Lac-Q scores persisted when age and anatomic patency were removed as potential confounding factors. Further larger, randomized studies would be helpful.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document