Woo Sub Shim, Min Jai Cho, Young Kang, Seok Hee Lee, Joo-Yeon Lee, Hahn Jin Jung
{"title":"Possibility of Pseudo-Obstruction in Lacrimal Canalicular Obstruction Diagnosed with Dacryocystography.","authors":"Woo Sub Shim, Min Jai Cho, Young Kang, Seok Hee Lee, Joo-Yeon Lee, Hahn Jin Jung","doi":"10.1159/000517485","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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 <0.05). No intraoperative or postoperative complications including sinusitis or synechia were found.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>About a quarter of lacrimal canalicular obstruction cases diagnosed with DCG seem to be pseudo-obstruction. The success rate of endoscopic DCR in pseudo-canalicular obstruction is similar to that of saccal and nasolacrimal ductal obstruction.</p>","PeriodicalId":520736,"journal":{"name":"ORL; journal for oto-rhino-laryngology and its related specialties","volume":" ","pages":"200-204"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000517485","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ORL; journal for oto-rhino-laryngology and its related specialties","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000517485","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/7/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
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 <0.05). No intraoperative or postoperative complications including sinusitis or synechia were found.
Conclusions: About a quarter of lacrimal canalicular obstruction cases diagnosed with DCG seem to be pseudo-obstruction. The success rate of endoscopic DCR in pseudo-canalicular obstruction is similar to that of saccal and nasolacrimal ductal obstruction.