Office- or Facility-Based Probing for Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology
- PMID: 33358412
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.10.028
Office- or Facility-Based Probing for Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology
Abstract
Purpose: To review the published literature assessing the efficacy and safety of in-office probing compared with facility-based probing to treat congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO).
Methods: Literature searches were conducted in March 2020 in the PubMed database with no date restrictions and limited to studies published in English and in the Cochrane Library database with no restrictions. The combined searches yielded 281 citations. Of these, 21 articles were deemed appropriate for inclusion in this assessment and assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologist. Four articles were rated level I, 2 articles were rated level II, and 15 articles were rated level III.
Results: Treatments consisted of observation, in-office nasolacrimal probing, or facility-based nasolacrimal probing. Success rates and complications or recurrences were recorded from 1 week to 6 months after surgery. Complete resolution of symptoms after surgery ranged from 66% to 95.6% for office-based procedures versus 50% to 97.7% for facility-based procedures. Level I evidence indicated that 66% of cases spontaneously resolved after 6 months of observation in infants between 6 and 10 months of age. Success rates for in-office probing were lower for bilateral than for unilateral NLDO (67% vs. 82%), whereas success rates were high in both unilateral (83%) and bilateral (82%) patients who underwent facility-based probing after 6 months of observation. Cost data did not indicate a definitive cost savings of either treatment method ($562 for in-office vs. $701 for facility-based, depending on cost models predicting spontaneous resolution rates at different ages). No serious adverse events with treatment or anesthesia were reported for either treatment method.
Conclusions: Evidence supports the efficacy and safety of both in-office and facility-based surgery for congenital NLDO. However, treating bilateral NLDO in a facility setting may be better. Because a significant percentage of children achieved resolution spontaneously before 12 months of age, deferring treatment until 12 to 18 months of age is a reasonable option. Additional research may address symptom burden on families and the impact of anesthesia and emotional trauma of nonsedated office probings on patients and may explore further the cost of treatment for each treatment method.
Keywords: anesthesia; canaliculus; cost benefit analysis; eyelids; facility-based surgery; nasolacrimal duct obstruction; office-based surgery.
Copyright © 2020 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Balloon Dacryoplasty for Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.Ophthalmology. 2018 Oct;125(10):1654-1657. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.05.005. Epub 2018 Jun 7. Ophthalmology. 2018. PMID: 29887332 Review.
-
A randomized trial comparing the cost-effectiveness of 2 approaches for treating unilateral nasolacrimal duct obstruction.Arch Ophthalmol. 2012 Dec;130(12):1525-33. doi: 10.1001/archophthalmol.2012.2853. Arch Ophthalmol. 2012. PMID: 23229693 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Office probing for treatment of nasolacrimal duct obstruction in infants.J AAPOS. 2014 Feb;18(1):26-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2013.10.016. J AAPOS. 2014. PMID: 24568978 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Nasolacrimal Duct Probing under Topical Anesthesia for Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction in Taiwan.Pediatr Neonatol. 2015 Dec;56(6):402-7. doi: 10.1016/j.pedneo.2015.04.001. Epub 2015 Apr 23. Pediatr Neonatol. 2015. PMID: 26026949
-
Pediatric nasolacrimal duct obstruction.Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2013 Sep;24(5):421-4. doi: 10.1097/ICU.0b013e3283642e94. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2013. PMID: 23846190 Review.
Cited by
-
Trends in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction surgical procedures in the United States from 2003 to 2016.J AAPOS. 2021 Dec;25(6):354-356. doi: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2021.06.002. Epub 2021 Sep 29. J AAPOS. 2021. PMID: 34600104 Free PMC article.
-
Assessing the success rate of treatment in simple and complex congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2024 Jul;262(7):1993-2004. doi: 10.1007/s00417-023-06318-4. Epub 2023 Dec 7. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2024. PMID: 38059998
-
Automated detection of retinal artery occlusion in fundus photography via self-supervised deep learning and multimodal interpretability using a multimodal AI chatbot.Med Biol Eng Comput. 2025 Mar 31. doi: 10.1007/s11517-025-03353-7. Online ahead of print. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2025. PMID: 40163243
-
Dacryoendoscopy-assisted incision of Hasner's valve under nasoendoscopy for membranous congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction after probing failure: a retrospective study.BMC Ophthalmol. 2021 Apr 19;21(1):182. doi: 10.1186/s12886-021-01948-w. BMC Ophthalmol. 2021. PMID: 33866971 Free PMC article.
-
Outcomes of Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction Surgery Converted into Balloon Dilation and Silicone Intubation due to Probing Difficulty.J Ophthalmol. 2022 Mar 12;2022:4045789. doi: 10.1155/2022/4045789. eCollection 2022. J Ophthalmol. 2022. PMID: 35313506 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources