The importance of sialography in the diagnostic evaluation of the condition of a patient with a parotid mass remains uncertain; some proponents advise use of sialography routinely, while others believe it to be worthless. To help resolve these conflicting opinions, a retrospective study of 40 patients was carried out that compared sialographical interpretations with respective surgical-histological findings. The results of this study show that generally reliable information, which may serve to influence therapeutic decisions concerning these patients, can be gleaned from sialography.