Misplaced Intracystic Lacrimal Implant- An Unusual Cause of Failed External Dacryocystorhinostomy

Background

Various techniques of dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) by an external or endonasal endoscopic approaches are in practice of ophthalmologists and otorhinolaryngologists. The purpose of this paper is to report a case of misplaced intracystic implant in the orbit following external DCR leading to persistence of watering, diplopia and visual diminution.

Case Report

A thirty nine year old female patient presented with recurrent left eye pain, swelling over medial side of the left eye, watering, progressive blurring of vision and diplopia after revision external DCR. The ophthalmology examination revealed bilateral decreased vision, left side restricted extraocular eye movements, sub capsular cataract. The computed tomography dacryocystograph (CT-DCG) revealed tubular foreign body in the extra-conal space abutting the medial rectus with proximal block in the nasolacrimal duct.

Conclusion

This is the first reported case of misplaced implant following external DCR in the literature. It may be suggested that patients undergoing intracystic larimal implant shall be on close follow up for such an occurrence later for timely intervention.

Peri-orbital surgical emphysema following endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy

BACKGROUND

Peri-orbital surgical emphysema is a rare complication that can occur after lacrimal surgery. It has only been described in isolated cases, following external dacryocystorhinostomy (n = 2) and Lester Jones tube insertion (n = 1).

METHOD

A retrospective, non-comparative case series was conducted of patients who developed surgical emphysema following endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy.

RESULTS

A total of 356 endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy cases (primary, n = 316; revision, n = 40) were performed over a six-year period. Seven cases of post-operative surgical emphysema were identified, all of which were preceded by uncontrolled sneezing, nose-blowing or coughing within the first week of surgery. The occurrence of surgical emphysema post-endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy in our centre was 7 in 356, or 2 per cent, over six years.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to report the occurrence of surgical emphysema post-endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Clinicians may wish to suggest patients stifle the aforementioned triggers within the first week to reduce the potential for surgical emphysema.

Teamwork Endoscopic Endonasal Surgery in Failed External Dacryocystorhinostomy

Purpose:

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results of a teamwork revision endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) in eyes with previously failed external DCR.

Methods:

This retrospective study was performed on 50 failed external DCR subjects who underwent a teamwork revision endoscopic DCR by an ophthalmologist and an otolaryngologist. Paranasal sinus CT scanning was performed for each patient before the revision surgery. During surgery, any abnormal tissue noticed before silicone intubation was sent for pathological evaluation.

Results:

Endoscopic revision DCR was performed on 50 failed external DCR subjects with one-year follow-up. Of these, 31 were female (62%). The age range of the subjects was 18-88 years (mean: 59.98 years). Sinus CT showed at least one abnormality in 94% of cases. Revision endoscopy showed septal deviation (66%), scar formation (32%), ostium problems (28%), and sump syndrome (6%). Pathologic and clinical findings showed that chronic inflammation had a significant association with scar tissue and septal synechia (P = 0.001 and 0.008, respectively). At the final follow-up, anatomical and functional success was achieved in 45 out of 50 (90%) of subjects.

Conclusion:

Endoscopic revision DCR when performed as cooperation of otolaryngologists and ophthalmologists may help resolve the endonasal problems and increase the success rate.

A study of 272 cases of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy

272 Patients with obstruction in nasolacrimal duct were treated by endoscopic nacryocystorhinostomy (DCR). The results were compared with that of external DCR and Endoscopic DCR without stent. In our study Endoscopic DCR with stening had better results. Endoscopic DCR with stenting has several advantages over the more conventional external approach and Endoscopic DCR without stenting. Results at 4 years of follow up have been good that is 98.6% patients were relieved of symptoms completely.