Kosin Medical Journal (고신대학교 의과대학 학술지)

Kosin University College of Medicine (고신대학교 의과대학)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Correlation between nasal mucosal thickness around the lacrimal sac fossa and surgical outcomes in endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy

  • Yoo, Jae Ho (Department of Ophthalmology, College of Medicine, Kosin University) ;
  • Kim, Chang Zoo (Department of Ophthalmology, College of Medicine, Kosin University) ;
  • Nam, Ki Yup (Department of Ophthalmology, College of Medicine, Kosin University) ;
  • Lee, Seung Uk (Department of Ophthalmology, College of Medicine, Kosin University) ;
  • Lee, Jae Ho (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Ulsan University Hospital, College of Medicine, Ulsan University) ;
  • Lee, Sang Joon (Department of Ophthalmology, College of Medicine, Kosin University)
  • Received : 2017.11.13
  • Accepted : 2017.11.16
  • Published : 2018.12.31
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: To identify the relationship between surgical success rate and preoperative nasal mucosal thickness around the lacrimal sac fossa, as measured using computed tomography. Methods: We reviewed 33 eyes from 27 patients who underwent endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy after diagnosis of primary nasolacrimal duct obstruction and who were followed-up with for at least six months between 2011 and 2014. We measured preoperative nasal mucosal thickness around the bony lacrimal sac fossa using computed tomography and analyzed patient measurements after classifying them into three groups: the successfully operated group, the failed operation group, and the non-operated group. Results: Surgery failed in six of the 33 eyes because of a granuloma at the osteotomy site and synechial formation of the nasal mucosa. The failed-surgery group showed a clinically significantly greater decrease in nasal mucosal thickness at the rearward lacrimal sac fossa compared with the successful-surgery group. However, nasal mucosal thickness of fellow eyes (i.e., non-operated eyes) was not significantly different between the two groups, and the location of the uncinate process did not appear to influence mucosal thickness. In the failed group, posteriorly located mucosal thickness of operated eye fossa was thinner than that of the non-operated eyes, but not significantly so. Conclusions: Our results from this quantitative anatomical study suggest that nasal mucosal thickness is a predictor of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy results.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF)

References

  1. Woog JJ. The incidence of symptomatic acquired lacrimal outflow obstruction among residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota, 1976-2000 (an American Ophthalmological Society thesis). Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 2007;105:649-66.
  2. Dietrich C, Mewes T, Kuhnemund M, Hashemi B, Mann WJ, Amedee RG. Long-term follow-up of patients with microscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy. Am J Rhinol 2003;17:57-61. https://doi.org/10.1177/194589240301700110
  3. Hartikainen J, Antila J, Varpula M, Puukka P, Seppa H, Grenman R . Prospective randomized comparison of endonasal endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy and external dacryocystorhinostomy. Laryngoscope 1998;108:1861-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005537-199812000-00018
  4. Leong SC, Karkos PD, Burgess P, Halliwell M, Hampal S. A comparison of outcomes between nonlaser endoscopic endonasal and external dacryocystorhinostomy: single-center experience and a review of British trends. Am J Otolaryngol 2010;31:32-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjoto.2008.09.012
  5. Leong SC, Macewen CJ, White PS. A systematic review of outcomes after dacryocystorhinostomy in adults. Am J Rhinol Allergy 2010;24:81-90. https://doi.org/10.2500/ajra.2010.24.3393
  6. Allen KM, Berlin AJ, Levine HL. Intranasal endoscopic analysis of dacrocystorhinostomy failure. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 1988;4:143-5. https://doi.org/10.1097/00002341-198804030-00004
  7. Nussbaumer M, Schreiber S, Yung MW. Concomitant nasal procedures in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. J Laryngol Otol 2004;118:267-9. https://doi.org/10.1258/002221504323011996
  8. Goldberg RA. Endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: is it really less successful? Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:108-10. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.122.1.108
  9. Ali MJ, Mishra DK, Baig F, Naik MN. Histopathology, Immunohistochemistry, and Electron Microscopic features of a Dacryocystorhinostomy Ostium Cicatrix. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2016;32:333-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/IOP.0000000000000530
  10. Ali MJ, Baig F, Lakshman M, Naik MN. Electron microscopic features of nasal mucosa treated with topical and circumostial injection of mitomycin C: implications in dacryocystorhinostomy. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2015;31:103-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/IOP.0000000000000205
  11. Heindl LM, Junemann A, Holbach LM. A clinicopathologic study of nasal mucosa in 350 patients with external dacryocystorhinostomy. Orbit 2009;28:7-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/01676830802414806
  12. Mauriello JA Jr, Palydowycz S, DeLuca J. Clinicopathologic study of lacrimal sac and nasal mucosa in 44 patients with complete acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 1992;8:13-21. https://doi.org/10.1097/00002341-199203000-00002
  13. Onerci M, Orhan M, Ogretmenoglu O, Irkec M. Long-term results and reasons for failure of intranasal endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Acta Otolaryngol 2000;120:319-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/000164800750001170
  14. Fayet B, Racy E, Assouline M. Systematic unciformectomy for a standardized endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy. Ophthalmology 2002;109:530-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(01)00977-0
  15. Hausler R, Caversaccio M. Microsurgical endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy with long-term insertion of bicanalicular silicone tubes. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1998;124:188-91. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.124.2.188
  16. Jokinen K, Karja J. Endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy. Arch Otolaryngol 1974;100:41-4. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.1974.00780040045009
  17. Wilhelm DL. Regeneration of tracheal epithelium. J Pathol Bacteriol 1953;65:543-50. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.1700650226
  18. Watelet JB, Bachert C, Gevaert P, Van Cauwenberge P. Wound healing of the nasal and paranasal mucosa: a review. Am J Rhinol 2002;16:77-84. https://doi.org/10.1177/194589240201600202
  19. Wynn TA. Cellular and molecular mechanisms of fibrosis. J Pathol 2008;214:199-210. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.2277
  20. Smirnov G, Pirinen R, Tuomilehto H, Seppa J, Terasvirta M, Uusitalo H, et al. Strong expression of HSP47 in metaplastic nasal mucosa may predict a poor outcome after primary endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: a prospective study. Acta Ophthalmol 2011;89:e132-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-3768.2009.01654.x
  21. Gul A, Aslan K, Karli R, Ariturk N, Can E. A Possible Cause of Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction: Narrow Angle Between Inferior Turbinate and Upper Part of the Medial Wall of the Maxillary Sinus. Curr Eye Res 2016:41:729-33. https://doi.org/10.3109/02713683.2015.1052520
  22. Yong AM, Zhao DB, Siew SC, Goh PS, Liao J, Amrith S. Assessment of bony nasolacrimal parameters among Asians. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2014;30:322-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/IOP.0000000000000101
  23. McCormick A, Sloan B. The diameter of the nasolacrimal canal measured by computed tomography: gender and racial differences. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2009;37:357-61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9071.2009.02042.x
  24. Bartley GB. Acquired lacrimal drainage obstruction: an etiologic classification system, case reports, and a review of the literature. Part 3. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 1993;9:11-26. https://doi.org/10.1097/00002341-199303000-00002
  25. Onerci M. Dacryocystorhinostomy. Diagnosis and treatment of nasolacrimal canal obstructions. Rhinology 2002;40:49-65.
  26. Ly TH, deShazo RD, Olivier J, Stringer SP, Daley W, Stodard CM. Diagnostic criteria for atrophic rhinosinusitis. Am J Med 2009;122:747-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2008.12.025
  27. Fayet B, Racy E, Assouline M. Complications of standardized endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy with unciformectomy. Ophthalmology 2004;111:837-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2003.08.023
  28. Fayet B, Racy E, Assouline M, Zerbib M. Surgical anatomy of the lacrimal fossa a prospective computed tomodensitometry scan analysis. Ophthalmology 2005;112:1119-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.01.012
  29. Woo KI, Maeng HS, Kim YD. Characteristics of intranasal structures for endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy in asians. Am J Ophthalmol 2011;152:491-498.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2011.02.019
  30. Yang JW, Oh HN. Success rate and complications of endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy with unciformectomy. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2012;250:1509-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-012-1992-x
  31. Jung, S.K., et al., Surgical outcomes of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: analysis of 1083 consecutive cases. Can J Ophthalmol, 2015;50:466-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjo.2015.08.007
  32. Karim, R., et al., A comparison of external and endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy for acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Clin Ophthalmol, 2011;5:979-89.
  33. Herzallah, I., et al., Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR): a comparative study between powered and non-powered technique. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2015;44:56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40463-015-0109-z
  34. Sarode, D., et al., The benefit of silicone stents in primary endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Otolaryngol, 2017;42:307-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/coa.12751
  35. Kim, S.Y., et al., No thermal tool using methods in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: no cautery, no drill, no illuminator, no more tears. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 2013;270:2677-82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-013-2408-1
  36. Beshay, N. and R. Ghabrial, Anatomical and subjective success rates of endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy over a seven-year period. Eye (Lond), 2016;30:1458-61. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2016.148
  37. Kostis, W.J., et al., Small pulmonary nodules: reproducibility of three-dimensional volumetric measurement and estimation of time to follow-up CT. Radiology, 2004;231:446-52. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2312030553