• Shui Liu, Huang Zhang, Yue-Rui Zhang, Li-Jun Chen, and Xiao-Yi Yu.
• The First Clinical College, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
• Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 Mar 15; 103 (11): e37312e37312.

BackgroundThis article aimed to discuss the efficacy and safety of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (EDCR) versus external dacryocystorhinostomy (EX-DCR) for the treatment of dacryocystitis by meta-analysis.MethodsAll randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were collected by searching the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang, from the establishment of the database to June 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 17.0 software and review manager 5.4 software. In the collected trials, the observation group was treated with EDCR, whereas the control group was treated with EX-DCR.ResultsA total of 10 studies involving 969 patients were included in this analysis. There was a similar surgical success rate in the treatment of dacryocystitis between the 2 groups (RR = 1.021, 95% CI [0. 803, 1.297], P = 0. 865). However, compared with the control group, patients in the observation group had a higher total effective rate of treatment (RR = 1. 195, 95% CI [1. 063, 1.343], P = .003), and shorter operative time (WMD = -23.640, 95% CI [-35.533, -11.747], P < .001), and less intraoperative blood loss (WMD = -50.797, 95% CI [-80.339, -21.255], P = .001), shorter length of hospital stays (WMD = -4.570, 95% CI [-5.992, -3.148], P < .001), and lower incidence of adverse events (RR = 0.295, 95% CI [0.173, 0.504], P < .001).ConclusionEDCR is an effective and safe surgical procedure for the treatment of dacryocystitis and can be used as an alternative to EX-DCR.Copyright © 2024 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

14 keywords...

hide…