AIM: To compare the treatment effect of dilating lacrimal drainage tube implantation and dacryocystorhinotomy under nasal endoscope and improvement of lacrimal sac and nasal cavity anastomosis.

METHODS: The effect of operation treatment of 136 chronic dacryocystitis patients in recent 3 years was retrospectively analyzed. 66 patients underwent the treatment of dilating lacrimal drainage tube implantation and nasal cavity dacryocyst pore under nasal endoscope. 70 patients underwent the treatment of improvement of lacrimal sac and nasal cavity anastomosis. All of the patients were unilateral chronic dacryocystitis.

RESULTS: Dilating lacrimal drainage tube implantation and dacryocystorhinotomy under nasal endoscope: 60 patients were cured; 5 patients were improved; 1 patient was invalid. The cure rate was 90.9%, effective rate 98.5%. Improvement of lacrimal sac and nasal cavity anastomosis: 64 patients were cured, 4 patients were improved, 2 patients were invalid, the cure rate was 91.4%, and effective rate was 97.1%. By using Chi-square test, P>0.05, there were no significant differences between the two groups.

CONCLUSION: There are the treatment effects of proximity about dilating lacrimal drainage tube implantation and dacryocystorhinotomy under nasal endoscope and improvement of lacrimal sac and nasal cavity anastomosis. But the operation of dilating lacrimal drainage tube implantation and dacryocystorhinotomy under nasal endoscope have small wound, less bleeding, without skin incision, which is worthy of clinical application.