In past years, external dacryocystorhinostomy has been considered the gold standard in terms of functional outcome for treatment for nasolacrimal duct obstruction. In comparison, interest in the use of the recently developed endonasal dacyocystorhinostomy procedure has been rekindled because of advances in instrumentation. For the past 10 years, differences in the outcomes between the two techniques have been reduced; thus, currently, the choice of the type of surgery is associated with the experience of the surgeon, resources available in the healthcare system and patient preferences.
Savino, G., Battendieri, R., Traina, S., Corbo, G., D'Amico, G., Gari, M., Scarano, E., Paludetti, G., External vs. endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: has the current view changed?, <<ACTA OTO-LARYNGOLOGICA>>, 2014; 34 (1): 29-35 [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/55836]
External vs. endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: has the current view changed?
Savino, Gustavo;Battendieri, Remo;Traina, Salvatore;Gari, Mariangela;Scarano, Emanuele;Paludetti, Gaetano
2014
Abstract
In past years, external dacryocystorhinostomy has been considered the gold standard in terms of functional outcome for treatment for nasolacrimal duct obstruction. In comparison, interest in the use of the recently developed endonasal dacyocystorhinostomy procedure has been rekindled because of advances in instrumentation. For the past 10 years, differences in the outcomes between the two techniques have been reduced; thus, currently, the choice of the type of surgery is associated with the experience of the surgeon, resources available in the healthcare system and patient preferences.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
