Quality of life assessment after non-laser endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy

Clinical Otolaryngology

Volumn 31, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 399-403

  Ho, A ^a   Sachidananda, R ^a   Carrie, S ^a   Neoh, C ^b  

^a FREEMAN HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL VICTORIA INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

STEROID;

ADULT; AGED; CONTROLLED STUDY; DACRYOCYSTORHINOSTOMY; EPIPHORA; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LACRIMATION DISORDER; LASER SURGERY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL AUDIT; MUCOCELE; NOSE POLYP; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RATING SCALE; REVIEW; TREATMENT FAILURE;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DACRYOCYSTORHINOSTOMY; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; LACRIMAL DUCT OBSTRUCTION; LASER SURGERY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33749436695     PISSN: 17494478     EISSN: 17494486     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2006.01278.x     Document Type: Review

References (16)

1. Cokkeser Y., Evereklioglu C.E.M. & Hamdi E.R. (2000) Comparitive external versus endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: results in 115 patients. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 123, 488-491
2. Hartikainen J., Antila J., Varpula M. et al. (1998) Prospective randomised comparison of endonasal endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy and external dacryocystorhinostomy. Laryngoscope 108, 1861-1866
3. Bartley G.B. (1994) The pros and cons of laser dacryocystorhinostomy. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 117, 103-106
4. Erdol H., Akyol N., Imamoglu H.I. et al. (2005) Long-term follow-up of external dacryocystorhinostomy and the factors affecting its success. Orbit 24, 99-102
5. Yung M.W. & Hardman-Lea S. (2002) Analysis of the results of surgical endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: effect of the level of obstruction. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 86, 792-794
6. Ben Simon G.J., Joseph J., Lee S. et al. (2005) External versus endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy for acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction in a tertiary referral center. Ophthalmology 112, 1463-1468
7. Wormald P.J. & Tsirbas A. (2004) Investigation and endoscopic treatment for functional and anatomical obstruction of the nasolacrimal duct system. Clin. Otolaryngol. 29, 352-356
8. Wormald P.J. (2002) Powered endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Laryngoscope 112, 69-72
9. Tsirbas A. & Wormald P.J. (2003) Endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy with mucosal flaps. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 135, 76-83
10. Moore W.M., Bentley C.R. & Olver J.M. (2002) Functional and anatomic results after two types of endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy: surgical and Holmium laser. Ophthalmology 109, 1575-1582
11. Robinson K., Gatehouse S. & Browning G.G. (1996) Measuring patient benefit from otorhinolaryngological surgery and therapy. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 105, 415-422
12. Gurler B. & San I. (2004) Long-term follow-up outcomes of nonlaser intranasal endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: how suitable and useful are conventional surgical instruments? Eur. J. Ophthalmol. 14, 453-460
13. Sprekelsen M.M. & Barberan M.T. (1996) Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy: surgical technique and results. Laryngoscope 106, 187-189
14. Royal College of Ophthalmologists (1999) Guidelines for Clinical Governance in Ophthalmology. Royal College of Ophthalmologists, London
15. Welham R.A. & Wulc A.E. (1987) Management of unsuccessful lacrimal surgery. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 103, 363-367
16. Bakri S.J., Carney A.S., Robinson K. et al. (1999) Quality of life outcomes following dacryocystorhinostomy: external and endonasal laser techniques compared. Orbit 18, 83-88