Possibility of Pseudo-Obstruction in Lacrimal Canalicular Obstruction Diagnosed with Dacryocystography

Introduction: Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) is the treatment of choice for patients with lacrimal drainage system obstruction. Dacryocystography (DCG) is one of the most common preoperative studies and considered as a useful test demonstrating the anatomy of lacrimal drainage systems. Objec...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:O.R.L. Journal for oto-rhino-laryngology and its related specialties 2022, Vol.84 (3), p.200-204
Hauptverfasser: Shim, Woo Sub, Cho, Min Jai, Kang, Young, Lee, Seok Hee, Lee, Joo-Yeon, Jung, Hahn Jin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Introduction: Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) is the treatment of choice for patients with lacrimal drainage system obstruction. Dacryocystography (DCG) is one of the most common preoperative studies and considered as a useful test demonstrating the anatomy of lacrimal drainage systems. Objective: This study was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of DCG for canalicular obstruction and to compare surgical outcomes between true-obstruction versus pseudo-obstruction diagnosed with DCG. Methods: A retrospective study was performed on 45 consecutive patients with lacrimal canalicular obstruction who had underwent endoscopic DCR with silicone tube insertion from January 2009 to December 2014 at a single tertiary hospital. A review of medical records included demographic data, preoperative symptoms and signs, results of intraoperative canalicular probing, and surgical outcomes including the postoperative symptom improvement and endoscopic finding. Results: Of 45 patients, 34 patients (75.6%) had true-canalicular obstructions and 11 patients (24.4%) had pseudo-canalicular obstructions. The success rate of endoscopic DCR was 50% (17 of 34) in cases with true-canalicular obstruction while 90.9% (10 of 11) in pseudo-canalicular obstruction (p value
ISSN:0301-1569
1423-0275
DOI:10.1159/000517485