Abstract：
The purpose of this study is to compare two dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) techniques in epiphora treatment. This study is a prospective randomized trial. Twenty-nine patients presenting persistent epiphora due to primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction (PANDO) were included in the study. Two groups each consisting of 15 eyes were formed. Mechanical transnasal endoscopic DCR (MTE-DCR) was applied to the first group, while transcanalicular dacryocystorhinostomy with multidiode laser (TCML-DCR) techniques is employed in the second group. Follow-up is conducted in the first day, first week, and first month of the dacryocystorhinostomy which is followed by 4-month follow-up period, and results were compared using statistical methods. The main outcome measures were the elimination of epiphora and unrestricted flow of irrigated saline to the nose. Seven patients were male, 22 were female, and the mean age was 39.3 ± 12.5 years. Mean follow-up times were 111.3 ± 10.5 months and 93 ± 2.9 months in group 1 and group 2, respectively. Complete resolution is achieved in group 1, whereas failures stemming from canalicular stenosis and fibrosis at osteotomy site are recorded in two cases in group 2. Occlusion occurred in the fifth month in both cases. Thus, long-term success rates were 100% in the first and 86.6% in the second group (P = 0.483). MTE-DCR is a strong substitute for external DCR. Although TCML-DCR shows promising results, it is far away from becoming the gold standard technique in epiphora treatment.
摘要：
本研究的目的是比较两种泪囊鼻腔吻合术（DCR）技术在泪溢治疗中的应用。本研究是一项前瞻性随机试验。该研究包括29名因原发性获得性鼻泪管阻塞（PANDO）而表现出持续性泪滴的患者。形成两组,每组由15只眼组成。第一组采用机械经鼻内镜DCR(MTE-DCR),而第二组采用多二极管激光经泪囊鼻腔吻合术(TCML-DCR)技术。随访在第一天进行，第一周,泪囊鼻腔吻合术的第一个月，随后是4个月的随访期，并采用统计学方法对结果进行比较。主要结果指标是消除泪液和不受限制的冲洗盐水流向鼻子。七名患者是男性，22是女性，平均年龄为39.3±12.5岁。第1组和第2组的平均随访时间分别为111.3±10.5个月和93±2.9个月。在第1组中实现了完全缓解，而在第2组中有2例记录了由于截骨部位的小管狭窄和纤维化引起的失败。两种情况都在第五个月发生闭塞。因此，第一组和第二组的长期成功率分别为100%和86.6%(P=0.483).MTE-DCR是外部DCR的有力替代品。尽管TCML-DCR显示了有希望的结果，它远未成为溢唇治疗的黄金标准技术。
