Comparison of a manometric tear duct irrigation test with dacryoscintigraphy in the investigation of epiphora

ABSTRACT

Purpose

Assessment of lacrimal resistance in patients with patent lacrimal systems is important in determining whether dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) surgery is appropriate. Current techniques, including lacrimal syringing and dacryoscintigraphy (DSG), can be unreliable. We compare the results of a manometric tear duct test (mTDT) irrigation technique with DSG in these patients.

Methods

All symptomatic patients in a specialist lacrimal clinic had full work-up apart from syringing. Lacrimal resistance was assessed using mTDT which applies a fixed head of fluid pressure via a cannula sealed to punctum. Conventional syringing was also performed in cases with abnormal mTDT. Symptomatic patients with delayed tear clearance, no external cause for watering and patent lacrimal systems had DSG. MTDT and DSG results were compared, including in asymptomatic fellow eyes.

Results

105 tear ducts were examined, 85 symptomatic. Symptomatic eyes had a significantly higher mean mTDT resistance (p = .0003) and more had abnormal mTDT (52%) compared to asymptomatic eyes (10%). Although mean tear duct resistance was higher in those with nasolacrimal duct stenosis (NLDS) than freely patent (FP) on syringing (8.5 vs 10.8 dpm), this was not significant (p = .6). High proportions of both FP and NLDS groups had no flow at all on mTDT (60% and 53%, respectively). DSG showed no significant difference in the symptomatic versus asymptomatic eyes (p = .36), nor between those with a normal or abnormal mTDT (p = .25), nor between FP and NLDS groups (p = .25).

Conclusions

In contrast to DSG, the mTDT provides valuable, objective information on lacrimal resistance that can guide a decision to DCR surgery.

KEYWORDS:

• Dacryocystorhinostomy
• dacryoscintigraphy
• epiphora
• lacrimal syringing
• manometric

Disclosure Statement

The authors report no conflict of interest.