We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MR dacryocystography: comparison with dacryocystography and CT dacryocystography.
AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology 2000 June
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Several techniques have been used to image the nasolacrimal system, providing functional (dacryoscintigraphy) or morphologic (dacryocystography, CT dacryocystography [CTD]) information. Using gadopentetate dimeglumine-diluted solution injected into the lacrimal canaliculus or instilled into the conjunctival sac, we compared the sensitivity of MR dacryocystography (MRD) with that of CTD.
METHODS: Eleven healthy volunteers and 25 patients affected by primary epiphora (21 patients) or postsurgical recurrent epiphora (four patients) underwent MRD after the topical administration of contrast media or cannulation of the lacrimal canaliculus. The MR imaging findings were compared with irrigation and CTD data. All patients underwent surgical treatment (dacryocystorhinostomy), which served as a standard of reference for confirming the MRD findings.
RESULTS: The topical administration of contrast-enhanced saline solution and the injection of contrast-enhanced saline solution after cannulation were always well tolerated. In healthy volunteers, outflow of contrast media was always revealed by MRD. Eight (32%) of 25 patients with epiphora had stenosis proximal to the lacrimal sac revealed by MRD, whereas 17 (68%) of 25 showed a dilated lacrimal sac and nasolacrimal duct stenosis, as confirmed by surgical findings. The findings of MRD after the topical administration of contrast medium and MRD after cannulation of the lacrimal canaliculus were comparable with irrigation or CTD data for all patients except one.
CONCLUSION: In patients with epiphora, MR imaging performed after the topical administration of diluted contrast material can reveal stenosis of the lacrimal apparatus and can be added to the standard orbital imaging protocol when lacrimal system involvement is suspected.
METHODS: Eleven healthy volunteers and 25 patients affected by primary epiphora (21 patients) or postsurgical recurrent epiphora (four patients) underwent MRD after the topical administration of contrast media or cannulation of the lacrimal canaliculus. The MR imaging findings were compared with irrigation and CTD data. All patients underwent surgical treatment (dacryocystorhinostomy), which served as a standard of reference for confirming the MRD findings.
RESULTS: The topical administration of contrast-enhanced saline solution and the injection of contrast-enhanced saline solution after cannulation were always well tolerated. In healthy volunteers, outflow of contrast media was always revealed by MRD. Eight (32%) of 25 patients with epiphora had stenosis proximal to the lacrimal sac revealed by MRD, whereas 17 (68%) of 25 showed a dilated lacrimal sac and nasolacrimal duct stenosis, as confirmed by surgical findings. The findings of MRD after the topical administration of contrast medium and MRD after cannulation of the lacrimal canaliculus were comparable with irrigation or CTD data for all patients except one.
CONCLUSION: In patients with epiphora, MR imaging performed after the topical administration of diluted contrast material can reveal stenosis of the lacrimal apparatus and can be added to the standard orbital imaging protocol when lacrimal system involvement is suspected.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app