Comparison between nasolacrimal syringing/probing, macrodacryocystography and surgical findings in the management of epiphora.

AIMS

Macrodacryocystography (MDCG) has been shown to be highly sensitive in evaluating the lacrimal drainage system. We aimed to compare the results of syringing/ probing with MDCG, and with surgical findings where available. We also aimed to determine whether MDCG is advisable in addition to syringing/probing when investigating epiphora.

METHODS

In a retrospective study, we looked at the records of 76 consecutive patients (86 eyes) presenting with epiphora over a period of 2 years (January 1993 to December 1994). All patients underwent syringing/probing and subsequent MDCG to determine the presence and level of nasolacrimal block. The results were then compared with surgical findings where available (46 eyes, 53%).

RESULTS

Surgical findings were predicted by MDCG in 95.5% of cases but in only 54% by probing. Probing findings agreed with MDCG in only 51% of cases. The main areas of disagreement were the presence of canalicular blocks and the presence of more than one block at different levels.

CONCLUSION

A combination of syringing/ probing and MDCG provides the most accurate pre-operative lacrimal assessment and should predict all the canalicular stenoses requiring intubation. In addition, MDCG can predict physiological duct blocks beyond canalicular blocks and thus alter surgical management.