Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the results of conjunctival dacryocystorhinostomy surgery with two different tear drainage tube. Methods: A total of 13 eyes of 13 patients (female 53.8%, male 46.2%) with persistent epiphora and secretion due to different etiologies were treated with two different tear drainage tube; silicone (PVP Metaireau tube-FCI Opththalmic), and Medpor coated tear drainage tube (Porex Surgical INC., Newnan, GA, USA). The choice of the tube was random, PVP tube was inserted in 8 (61.5 %) eyes and Medpor coated tube was inserted in 5 (38.5 %) eyes of patients in proximal obstruction of lacrimal system with different etiologies (functional obstruction secondary to external dacryocystorhinostomy, traumatic upper lacrimal system damaged, punctal atresia). The mean follow-up period was 16 months (range 12 to 24 months) in PVP and 24 months (range 12 to 36 months) in Medpor coated tear drainage tube. During the follow-up period, patients were observed for the patency of the lacrimal system and the complications. Results: The patency of lacrimal system with lacrimal irrigation test was found negative in 8 of 13 (61.5%) patients. There was statistically difference between the patency of lacrimal system and type of the lacrimal drainage tube (p = 0.032 < 0.05). During the follow-up period 9 of 13 (69.2%) patients had more then one complication, 2 of 13 (15.4%) patients had only one complication, and 2 (15.4%) of patients had no complication. The complication rates didn't changed according to type of the tube (p = 0.103 > 0.05). Conclusion: Although variations in technique and tube design will reduce the complications rates of conjunctival dacryocystorhinostomy, Medpor coated tear drainage tube seems to have some advantages in the stabilization and the patency of the lacrimal system. But further studies with longer follow-up times and a larger number of cases are needed to determine certain superiority of these two materials.

Authors and Affiliations