.png)
Bicanalicular silicone tubes versus otologic T-tubes in endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy. Objective: We compared the efficacy of T-tubes and bicanalicular silicone tubes in endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR).
Method: We retrospectively reviewed 54 eyes of 49 patients who had experienced nasolacrimal duct obstruction and undergone endoscopic DCR. Group one had bicanalicular silicone tube stents implanted (24 eyes), and group two consisted of patients who had otologic T-tubes (30 eyes). The duration of stent placement, follow-up time, and the subjective and objective success of the procedures were evaluated. Cases were grouped as failure or success according to improvement in epiphora complaint.
Results: An endoscopic DCR procedure was successful in 19 (79.2%) cases in the silicone group and in 23 (76.7%) cases in the T-tube group. The success rate did not differ significantly between the groups (p = 0.83). The most common cause of failure was granuloma formation in the bicanalicular silicone tube group and spontaneous tube loss in the otologic T-tube group.
Conclusions: The findings revealed that both the otologic T-tube and the bicanalicular silicone tube had similar success rates (76.7% and 79.2%, respectively). We believe that otologic T-tubes, which are less expensive and more easily acquired, might be offered as an alternative to bicanalicular silicone tubes in patients with nasolacrimal duct obstruction.