External vs. endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: Six of one, a half dozen of the other?

Knut Eichhorn, Andrew R Harrison

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

16 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose of review: The purpose of this review is to describe the results from published clinical studies evaluating the efficacy of two types of dacryocystorhinostomy, namely external and endonasal. Recent findings: Many studies report high success rates with either procedure in alleviating the consequences of nasolacrimal duct obstruction. However, only a few studies have compared the two approaches in a prospective, randomized fashion. Summary: Both types of procedure achieve excellent outcomes, and there is no definitive evidence from published, large-scale studies that one approach is superior to the other.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)396-403
Number of pages8
JournalCurrent Opinion in Ophthalmology
Volume21
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2010

Keywords

  • dacryocystitis
  • dacryocystorhinostomy
  • endonasal endoscope
  • nasolacrimal duct obstruction

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'External vs. endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: Six of one, a half dozen of the other?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this