Evaluation of the anatomical and functional viability of dacryocystorhinostomy ostium in the postoperative period
M. V. Nersesyan,
Z. V. Surnina,
N. N. Krakhovetskiy,
A. A. Maydanova,
V. I. Popadyuk,
T. A. Galkina,
T. N. Zhogoleva https://doi.org/10.21518/ms2025-127
Abstract
Introduction. Recurrence of dacryocystitis after dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) via external, transcanalicular or endonasal approaches is most often associated with the occurrence of pathological processes in the area of the DCR ostium. Dynamic assessment of its condition is a key issue in postoperative period patient management.
Aim. To develop a simple and convenient scale for assessing the DCR ostium condition for clinical use.
Materials and methods. In the course of a prospective study, a dynamic observation of 54 patients (60 cases) was carried out after endoscopic endonasal DCR. The assessment was carried out using FICI scale by 4 parameters: fluorescein endoscopic dye test (FEDT), condition of the internal common opening (ICO), cicatricial processes in the DCR ostium, presence of pathological processes in the ICO area (synechiae, granulomas, membranes). Such parameters as the severity of pathological changes in the DCR ostium margins and the presence of a lacrimal implant were also taken into account. Observation was carried out at 2, 4, 8 and 12 weeks after DCR. Results. During the obtained data analysis the parameters that have the greatest impact on the anatomical and functional results of DCR were determined. A scoring system for assessing DCR ostium parameters was developed. With its help it is possible not only to standardize the approach to patient care after DCR, but also to timely assess the need for corrective surgical intervention in the postoperative period.
Conclusion. A scale for assessing the state of the DCR ostium is proposed, which can be used to objectively assess the state of the DCR ostium and evaluate the need for repeated surgical intervention in order to improve the patency of the LD. This allows for a standardized approach to patient management in the postoperative period. The scoring system is easy to remember and allows for a short assessment of the state of the DS, which makes it convenient for use in everyday clinical practice.
About the Authors
M. V. Nersesyan
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba;
Ilyinskaya Hospital, Head and Neck Surgery Center
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Marina V. Nersesyan, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor of the Department of Otolaryngology, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba; Otorhinolaryngologist, Ilyinskaya Hospital, Head and Neck Surgery Center
6, Miklukho-Maklai St., Moscow, 117198;
2, Bldg. 2, Glukhovo Village, Rublevskoe predmestʹe, Krasnogorsk Urban District, Moscow Region, 143421
Z. V. Surnina
Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Zoya V. Surnina, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Сhief Researcher, Department of Pathology of Optical Media of the Eye, Ophthalmologist
11 А, Rossolimo St., Moscow, 119021
N. N. Krakhovetskiy
Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases;
Central State Medical Academy of Department for Presidential Affairs of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Nikolay N. Krakhovetskiy, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Leading Researcher of the Department of Lacrimal Apparatus Pathology, Ophthalmologist, Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases; Associate Professor of the Department of Otolaryngology, Central State Medical Academy of Department for Presidential Affairs of the Russian Federation
11 А, Rossolimo St., Moscow, 119021;
19, Bldg. 1а, Marshal Timoshenko St., Moscow, 121359
A. A. Maydanova
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba;
Federal Medical Biophysical Center named after A.I. Burnazyan
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Anastasiya A. Maydanova, Applicant for the Department of Otolaryngology, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba; 6, Miklukho-Maklai St., Moscow, 117198, Russia; Otorhinolaryngologist, Federal Medical Biophysical Center named after A.I. Burnazyan;
6, Miklukho-Maklai St., Moscow, 117198;
23, Marshal Novikov St., Moscow, 123098
V. I. Popadyuk
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Valentin I. Popadyuk, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Dean of the Faculty of Continuous Medical Education, Head of the Department of Otolaryngology of the Medical Institute
6, Miklukho-Maklai St., Moscow, 117198
T. A. Galkina
Federal Medical Biophysical Center named after A.I. Burnazyan
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Tatiana A. Galkina, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Head of the Otolaryngology Department
23, Marshal Novikov St., Moscow, 123098
T. N. Zhogoleva
Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Tamara N. Zhogoleva, Postgraduate Student
1, Ostrovityanov St., Moscow, 117997
References
1. Jawaheer L, MacEwen CJ, Anijeet D. Endonasal versus external dacryocystorhinostomy for nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;2(2):CD007097. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007097.pub3.
2. Ali MJ, Psaltis AJ, Wormald PJ. Evaluation of a DCR Ostium and DOS Scoring. Principles and Practice of Lacrimal Surgery. 2017;327–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5442-6_31.
3. Tadke K, Lahane V, Lokhande P. Ostium Characteristics and Its Relevance in Successful Outcome Following Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022;74(S2):900–910. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-020-01970-2.
4. Różycki R, Skrzypiec Ł, Ulaszewska K, Gąsior JS, Wasyluk J. Effectiveness and Factors Influencing Success of Transcanalicular Laser-Assisted Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy: Cohort Study. Diagnostics. 2024;14(17):1944. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14171944.
5. Ali MJ, Psaltis AJ, Ali MH, Wormald PJ. Endoscopic assessment of the dacryocystorhinostomy ostium after powered endoscopic surgery: behaviour beyond 4 weeks. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2015;43(2):152–155. https://doi.org/10.1111/ceo.12383.
6. Wormald PJ. Powered endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy. Larynoscope. 2002;112:69–72. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005537-200201000-00013
7. Ali MJ. Abnormal DCR Ostium. Singapore: Springer; 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6127-0_3.
8. Ali MJ, Psaltis AJ, Wormald PJ. Dacryocystorhinostomy ostium: parameters to evaluate and DCR ostium scoring. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014;8:2491–2499. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S73998.
9. Konuk O. Unsuccessful lacrimal surgery: causative factors and results of its surgical management in a tertiary referral center. Ophthalmology. 2011;225(4):237. https://doi.org/10.1159/000322858.
10. Bertaux PJ, Gan G, Hirtz G, Mouret P, El-Hachem F, Lhuillier L, Perone J-M. Evaluation of ostium size following endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy as a predictive factor of outcome: A prospective study. J Fr Ophtalmol. 2021;44(3):397–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfo.2020.05.024.
11. Ali MJ, Gupta A, Lakshmi CS, Ali MH. The FICI grading for a dacryocystorhinostomy ostium. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2022;32(1):129–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1120672121994747.
12. Tai ELM, Amirul-Hasbi TP, Zamli AH, Rajet KA, Kueh YC. Correlation of the fluorescein dye disappearance test and endoscopic dye transit time in patients after surgery for nasolacrimal duct obstruction. J Fr Ophtalmol. 2025;48(3):104388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfo.2024.104388.
13. Mann BS, Wormald PJ. Endoscopic assessment of the dacryocystorhinostomy ostium after endoscopic surgery. Laryngoscope. 2006;116(7):1172–1174. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlg.0000218099.33523.19.
14. Fayet B, Katowitz WR, Racy E, Ruban JM, Katowitz JA. Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: the keys to surgical success. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;30(1):69–71. https://doi.org/10.1097/IOP.0000000000000038.
15. Ali MJ, Wormald PJ, Psaltis AJ. The Dacryocystorhinostomy Ostium Granulomas: Classification, Indications for Treatment, Management Modalities and Outcomes. Orbit. 2015;34(3):146–151. https://doi.org/10.3109/01676830.2015.1014510.
16. Ben Simon GJ, Brown C, McNab AA. Larger osteotomies result in larger ostia in external dacryocystorhinostomies. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2012;14(2):127–131. https://doi.org/10.1001/archfaci.2011.73.
17. Dave TV, Mohammed FA, Ali MJ, Naik MN. Etiologic analysis of 100 anatomically failed dacryocystorhinostomies. Clin Ophthalmol. 2016;10:1419–1422. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S113733.
18. Vinciguerra A, Indelicato P, Giordano Resti A, Bussi M, Trimarchi M. Longterm results of a balloon-assisted endoscopic approach in failed dacryocystorhinostomies. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2022;279(4):1929–1935. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-021-06975-3.
19. Baldeschi L, Nolst Trenité GJ, Hintschich C, Koornneef L. The intranasal ostium after external dacryocystorhinostomy and the internal opening of the lacrimal canaliculi. Orbit. 2000;19(2):81–86. https://doi.org/10.1076/0167-6830(200006)1921-pft081.
20. Yalcin Tok O, Kocaoglu AF, Unlu I, Demir MN, Kosar U, Ornek F. Evaluation of Intranasal Ostium in External Dacryocystorhinostomy. Med J Trakya Un. 2011;28:409–413. https://doi.org/10.5174/tutfd.2010.04263.2.
21. Tokat T, Tokat S, Kusbeci T. Long-term outcomes of transcanalicular laser dacryocystorhinostomy versus endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy and a review of the literature. Niger J Clin Pract. 2023;26(8):1069–1074. https://doi.org/10.4103/njcp.njcp_349_22.
22. Feijó ED, Caixeta JA, Souza BAA de, Limongi RM. Long-term outcomes of modified transcanalicular diode laser dacryocystorhinostomy. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2024;87(4):e2023. https://doi.org/10.5935/0004-2749.2023-0143.
23. Nacaroglu SA, Ogreden S, Yılmaz A, Atalay K, Kırgız A. Comparison of outcomes of conventional transcanalicular laser dacryocystorhinostomy and modified transcanalicular laser dacryocystorhinostomy. Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques. 2018;13(3):401–406. https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2018.77054
24. Basmak H, Caklı H, Sahin A, Gursoy H, Ozer A, Altun E, Yildirim N. Comparison of endocanalicular laser dacryocystorhinostomy with and without endonasal procedures. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011;249(5):737–743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-010-1552-1.
25. Dogan R, Meric A, Ozsütcü M, Yenigun A. Diode laser-assisted endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: a comparison of three different combinations of adjunctive procedures. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2013;270(8):2255–2261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-013-2351-1.
26. Nomura K, Arakawa K, Sugawara M, Hidaka H, Suzuki J, Katori Y. Factors influencing endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy outcome. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017;274(7):2773–2777. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-017-4541-8.
27. Ganguly A, Kaza H, Kapoor A, Sheth J, Ali MH, Tripathy D, Rath S. Comparative Evaluation of the Ostium After External and Nonendoscopic Endonasal Dacryocystorhinostomy Using Image Processing (Matlabs and Image J) Softwares. Ophthalmic Plastic Reconstr Surg. 2017;33(5):345–349. https://doi.org/10.1097/iop.0000000000000786.
28. Al Huthail RR, Al-Faky YH. Late endoscopic evaluation of the ostium size after external dacryocystorhinostomy. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2021;31(6):3425–3429. https://doi.org/10.1177/1120672120976044.
29. Shin HJ, Woo KI, Kim Y‐D. Factors associated with rhinostomy shape after endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Clin Otolaryngol. 2017;42(3):550–556. https://doi.org/10.1111/coa.12767.
30. Kwon YA, Kim HC, Ha MS, Kim SJ, Jang JW. Success Rates According to the Shape of Rhinostomy After Endonasal Dacryocystorhinostomy. J Korean Ophthalmolog Soc. 2009;50(1):14. https://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2009.50.1.14.
Review
For citations:
Nersesyan MV, Surnina ZV, Krakhovetskiy NN, Maydanova AA, Popadyuk VI, Galkina TA, Zhogoleva TN. Evaluation of the anatomical and functional viability of dacryocystorhinostomy ostium in the postoperative period. Meditsinskiy sovet = Medical Council. 2025;19(13):116-122. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21518/ms2025-127
Views:
16
Email this article 