Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

MR dacryocystography: comparison with dacryoendoscopy in positional diagnosis of nasolacrimal duct obstruction

  • HEAD, NECK AND DENTAL RADIOLOGY
  • Published:
La radiologia medica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the findings of MR dacryocystography with those of dacryoendoscopy and subsequent surgery in patients with nasolacrimal duct obstruction, and to determine the efficacy of MR dacryocystography in the positional diagnosis of nasolacrimal duct obstruction.

Materials and methods

Thirty-one patients with clinically suspected nasolacrimal duct obstruction who underwent MR dacryocystography and dacryoendoscopy with subsequent surgical procedure were included. MR dacryocystography was performed by using heavily T2-weighted fast spin echo sequence in the coronal and axial planes after the topical administration of normal saline drops into the conjunctival sacs.

Results

In MR dacryocystography, stenosis/obstruction at the canalicular level was correctly diagnosed in nine patients (100 %). Stenosis/obstruction at the lacrimal sac level was correctly diagnosed in 14 of 16 patients (87.5 %) in MR dacryocystography. Three patients with coexistent stenosis/obstruction at both the canalicular and the lacrimal sac level were misinterpreted as stenosis/obstruction at the canalicular level on MR dacryocystography. The overall accuracy of MR dacryocystography in depicting stenosis/obstruction was 84 %.

Conclusions

MR dacryocystography after the topical administration of normal saline drops into the conjunctival sacs is a well-tolerated, minimally invasive imaging technique to identify the level of stenosis/obstruction in patients with nasolacrimal duct obstruction before dacryoendoscopy and subsequent surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Song HY, Ahn HS, Park CK, Kwon SH, Kim CS, Choi KC (1993) Complete obstruction of the nasolacrimal system. Part I. Treatment with balloon dilation. Radiology 186:367–371

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sasaki T, Nagata Y, Sugiyama K (2005) Nasolacrimal duct obstruction classified by dacryoendoscopy and treated with inferior meatal dacryorhinotomy. Part I: Positional diagnosis of primary nasolacrimal duct obstruction with dacryoendoscope. Am J Ophthalmol 140:1065–1069

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Caldemeyer KS, Stockberger SM Jr, Broderick LS (1998) Topical contrast-enhanced CT and MR dacryocystography: imaging the lacrimal drainage apparatus of healthy volunteers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:1501–1504

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Massoud TF, Whittet HB, Anslow P (1993) CT-dacryocystography for nasolacrimal duct obstruction following paranasal sinus surgery. Br J Radiol 66:223–227

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hoffmann KT, Hosten N, Anders N, Stroszczynski C, Liebig T, Hartmann C, Felix R (1999) High-resolution conjunctival contrast-enhanced MRI dacryocystography. Neuroradiology 41:208–213

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Weber AL, Rodriguez-DeVelasquez A, Lucarelli MJ, Cheng HM (1996) Normal anatomy and lesions of the lacrimal sac and duct: evaluated by dacryocystography, computed tomography, and MR imaging. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 6:199–217

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Manfre L, de Maria M, Todaro E, Mangiameli A, Ponte F, Lagalla R (2000) MR dacryocystography: comparison with dacryocystography and CT dacryocystography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 21:1145–1150

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Takehara Y, Isoda H, Kurihashi K, Isogai S, Kodaira N, Masunaga H, Sugiyama M, Ozawa F, Takeda H, Nozaki A, Sakahara H (2000) Dynamic MR dacryocystography: a new method for evaluating nasolacrimal duct obstructions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 175:469–473

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cubuk R, Tasali N, Aydin S, Saydam B, Sengor T (2010) Dynamic MR dacryocystography in patients with epiphora. Eur J Radiol 73:230–233

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ashenhurst ME, Hurwitz JJ (1991) Lacrimal canaliculoscopy: development of the instrument. Can J Ophthalmol 26:306–308

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Cohen SW, Prescott R, Sherman M, Banko W, Castillejos ME (1979) Dacryoscopy. Ophthalmic Surg 10:57–63

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fein W, Daykhovsky L, Papaioannou T, Beeder C, Grundfest WS (1992) Endoscopy of the lacrimal outflow system. Arch Ophthalmol 110:1748–1750

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sasaki T, Nagata Y, Sugiyama K (2005) Nasolacrimal duct obstruction classified by dacryoendoscopy and treated with inferior meatal dacryorhinotomy: Part II. Inferior meatal dacryorhinotomy. Am J Ophthalmol 140:1070–1074

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sasaki H, Takano T, Murakami A (2013) Direct endoscopic probing for congenital lacrimal duct obstruction. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 41:729–734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sasaki T, Miyashita H, Miyanaga T, Yamamoto K, Sugiyama K (1996) Dacryoendoscopic observation and incidence of canalicular obstruction/stenosis associated with S-1, an oral anticancer drug. Jpn J Ophthalmol 56:214–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Karagulle T, Erden A, Erden I, Zilelioglu G (2002) Nasolacrimal system: evaluation with gadolinium-enhanced MR dacryocystography with a three-dimensional fast spoiled gradient-recalled technique 12:2343–2348

    Google Scholar 

  17. Goldberg RA, Heinz GW, Chiu L (1993) Gadolinium magnetic resonance imaging dacryocystography. Am J Ophthalmol 115:738–741

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Amrith S, Goh PS, Wang SC (2005) Tear flow dynamics in the human nasolacrimal ducts—a pilot study using dynamic magnetic resonance imaging. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 243:127–131

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Coskun B, Ilgit E, Onal B, Konuk O, Erbas G (2012) MR dacryocystography in the evaluation of patients with obstructive epiphora treated by means of interventional radiologic procedures. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 33:141–147

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Yoshikawa T, Hirota S, Sugimura K (2000) Topical contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance dacryocystography. Radiat Med 18:355–362

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. Jou Sakai, Department of Ophthalmology, Kasai City Hospital, for technical procedure of dacryoendoscopy.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tsutomu Tamada.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Hiroki Higashi declares that he has no conflict of interest. Tsutomu Tamada declares that he has no conflict of interest. Kenichi Mizukawa declares that he has no conflict of interest. Katsuyoshi Ito declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

This retrospective study was approved by our institutional review board, and the requirement for informed consent was waived.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Higashi, H., Tamada, T., Mizukawa, K. et al. MR dacryocystography: comparison with dacryoendoscopy in positional diagnosis of nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Radiol med 121, 580–587 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-016-0632-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-016-0632-7

Keywords

Navigation