Background: Endoscopic DCR is a surgical procedure to drain the lacrimal sac in instances of instrasaccular and postsaccular obstruction. The most common causes of failure of dacryocystorhinostomy are obstruction of the rhinostomy site and of the common canaliculus. Therefore some authorities postulated that intubation of the nasolacrimal system during dacryocystorhinostomy may prevent closure and scarring of rhinostoma whereas some authors do not support stenting. A bicanalicular silicone tube is the stent most often used in DCR procedures to prevent obliteration of the rhinostomy opening. As an alternative method to silicon intubation, several other materials have been used. Objectives: Our study was done to compare the results of endoscopic DCR with and without prolene stenting and to assess the usage of prolene as stenting material in En DCR. Methods: The surgical outcomes of Endoscopic Endonasal Dacryocystorhinostomy (En DCR) with and without prolene stenting were compared in fifty patients of chronic dacryocystitis who had nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Prolene stent in EnDCR was used in 50% of randomly selected cases. Surgical success was evaluated subjectively and objectively after 10 weeks and results compared. The patients were followed at 3 months. Results: Most of the patients were in the fourth decade (30%) of age, with female predominance (82%) and majority presented with disease on the left side (52%). The success rate was 92% with prolene stenting as compared to 88% without stent. There was no statistical difference in the results of two groups. Conclusion: Endoscopic DCR has a good success rate with and without nasolacrimal stenting. Prolene as a stenting material is effective in primary cases with nasolacrimal duct obstruction. It can be used as an alternative to silicone, especially in settings with limited resources.