Evaluation of the clinical efficacy of endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy in treating chronic dacryocystitis.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the short-term clinical efficacy and safety of endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) and traditional external DCR in patients with chronic dacryocystitis.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical records of patients with chronic dacryocystitis treated at our hospital from November 2022 to November 2025. Patients were retrospectively categorized according to the surgical procedure received: the research group underwent endoscopic endonasal DCR, whereas the control group underwent traditional external DCR. Clinical data from all patients were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed in the recorded baseline characteristics between the two groups (P > 0.05). The clinical efficacy between the two groups showed no significant difference (P > 0.05), nor did the main symptom scores (P > 0.05). However, the research group demonstrated significantly lower intraoperative blood loss and shorter postoperative hospital stays compared to the control group (P < 0.05). The overall incidence of postoperative adverse events was also lower in the research group than in the control group (P < 0.05), and self-reported patient satisfaction was higher in the research group than in the control group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Within the 2-month postoperative follow-up, unadjusted comparisons showed that endoscopic endonasal DCR was associated with lower intraoperative blood loss, shorter postoperative hospitalization, a lower overall incidence of postoperative adverse events, and higher self-reported patient satisfaction than traditional external DCR. No statistically significant between-group differences were detected in short-term anatomical or functional success. Larger prospective studies with adjustment for potential confounders and longer follow-up are required to confirm these findings.