Comparison of the Impact of Different Dacryocystorhinostomy Techniques on Patient Quality of Life in Lacrimal Duct Obstruction

Objectives: To prospectively compare the outcomes of external dacryocystorhinostomy (EX-DCR), endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy (EN-DCR), and laser-assisted transcanalicular dacryocystorhinostomy (TL-DCR) in patients with nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO) and to evaluate the relationship between surgical outcomes and patient quality of life (QoL). Methods: This prospective comparative study included patients presenting with epiphora who were diagnosed with NLDO and scheduled for surgical treatment. Patients underwent EX-DCR, EN-DCR, or TL-DCR according to patient preference and nasal anatomical characteristics. All patients received bicanalicular silicone tube intubation. Follow-up examinations were performed on postoperative day 1, week 1, at month 1, and every three months thereafter. Anatomical success was defined as patency on nasolacrimal irrigation, and functional success was defined as a postoperative Munk score of ≤ 1 (complete or near-complete resolution of epiphora). QoL was assessed using the Lacrimal Symptom Questionnaire (Lac-Q) and the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI). Statistical comparisons were performed between groups. Results: A total of 69 patients (45 women, 24 men; mean age 58.99 ± 14.86 years) were included, with a mean follow-up of 17.19 ± 4.07 months. The highest postoperative pain scores were observed in the EX-DCR group; with no significant intergroup differences. Anatomical success rates were 92% for EX-DCR, 90.5% for EN-DCR, and 91.3% for TL-DCR. Functional success rates were 88%, 90.5%, and 82.7%, respectively, with no statistically significant difference among techniques (p > 0.05). All groups showed postoperative improvement in Lac-Q and GBI scores. Numerically greater improvements were observed in the EN-DCR group, although intergroup differences were not statistically significant. Conclusions: EX-DCR achieved the numerically highest anatomical success rate, whereas EN-DCR demonstrated numerically greater improvement in patient-reported QoL outcomes. However, no statistically significant differences in anatomical success, functional success, or QoL measures were observed among the three techniques. Overall, all three procedures were effective surgical options for the treatment of NLDO.