A comparison of treatment approaches for bilateral congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction

Anisometropia and Amblyopia Outcomes in Early Versus Late Resolution of Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction in Older Infants

PURPOSE

Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction is a known risk factor for amblyopia and anisometropia. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the rate of anisometropia and amblyopia development differed based on the age at CNLDO resolution in older infants.

METHODS

This retrospective chart review at a single tertiary children's hospital from 2007 to 2017 compared early versus late spontaneous resolution (cutoff 12 months) and intervention (cutoff 15 months) groups presenting at ≥9 months of age, comparing visual outcomes, including anisometropia (≥1 D of sphere or cylinder) and amblyopia (≥2 levels difference in Teller acuity or optotype testing). Parents/guardians were contacted by phone for missing data on spontaneous resolution or intervention status.

RESULTS

A total of 462 patients were included (152 early; 310 late group). The early group presented at a median age of 12.0 (interquartile range: 10.0, 13.0) months, while the late group presented at 21.0 (interquartile range: 15.0, 32.0) months. Unilateral disease occurred in 62% and 59%, respectively. Anisometropia was seen in (12/102) 12% of early versus (25/243) 10% of late patients (p = 0.686, 95% CI: -0.059, 0.088), and amblyopia in (4/131) 3% of early versus (14/286) 5% of late patients (p = 0.322, 95% CI: -0.061, 0.018). In patients presenting <24 months without undergoing surgery, spontaneous resolution occurred in 76% between 12 and 24 months (n = 41).

CONCLUSIONS

Anisometropia and amblyopia rates did not significantly differ between early and delayed intervention for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction in this retrospective cohort presenting beyond 9 months of age to a children's hospital. This study found frequent late spontaneous resolution.

Factors Associated With Nasolacrimal Duct Probing Failure Among Children in the Intelligent Research in Sight Registry

Importance

Understanding the factors associated with nasolacrimal duct probing failure in young children may help inform practice patterns.

Objective

To identify factors associated with repeated nasolacrimal duct probing in young children.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from the Intelligent Research in Sight (IRIS) Registry for all children who underwent nasolacrimal duct probing before 4 years of age between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2020.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to assess the cumulative incidence of a repeated procedure within 2 years of the initial procedure. Hazard ratios (HRs) derived from multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to evaluate the association between repeated probing and patient age, sex, race and ethnicity, geographic region, operative side, laterality of obstruction, type of initial procedure, and surgeon volume.

Results

This study included 19 357 children (9823 [50.7%] male; mean [SD] age, 1.40 [0.74] years) undergoing nasolacrimal duct probing. The cumulative incidence of repeated nasolacrimal duct probing was 7.2% (95% CI, 6.8%-7.5%) within 2 years of the initial procedure. Among 1333 repeated procedures, the second procedure involved silicone intubation in 669 (50.2%) and balloon catheter dilation in 256 (19.2%). Among 12 008 children aged 1 year or younger, office-based simple probing was associated with a slightly higher probability of reoperation compared with facility-based simple probing (9.5% [95% CI, 8.2%-10.8%] vs 7.1% [95% CI, 6.5%-7.7%]; P < .001). In the multivariable model, a greater risk of repeated probing was associated with bilateral obstruction (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.32-1.65; P < .001) and office-based simple probing (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.13-1.55; P < .001), and a lower risk was associated with primary balloon catheter dilation (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.85; P < .001) and procedures performed by high-volume surgeons (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.73-0.97; P = .02). Age, sex, race and ethnicity, geographic region, and operative side were not associated with reoperation risk in the multivariable model.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, most children in the IRIS Registry undergoing nasolacrimal duct probing before 4 years of age did not require any additional intervention. Factors associated with lower risk of reoperation include surgeon experience, probing performed under anesthesia, and primary balloon catheter dilation.

Trends in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction surgical procedures in the United States from 2003 to 2016

In this population-based retrospective cohort study, the Optum claims dataset was used to identify children <4 years of age with the diagnosis of nasolacrimal duct obstruction during the period 2003-2016. A total of 156,044 children were identified, of whom 16,538 (9.43%) underwent a surgical procedure. There was a downward trend for the frequency of all types of treatments but particularly for facility-based probings.

Efficacy and Safety of Inhalation Sedation during Office Probing for Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction

We compared the effectiveness of inhaled sevoflurane versus physical restraint during probing in children with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO). We performed a retrospective review of children with CNLDO who underwent office probing procedures by a single surgeon under sedation or restraint. Patients’ characteristics at the time of probing, including age, sex, laterality, previous non-surgical treatment, presence of dacryocystitis, outcomes of probing, and complications were compared between the sedation and restraint groups. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate the prognostic factors associated with the success of probing. A subgroup analysis by 12 months of age was also conducted. The overall success rate was 88.6% in 202 eyes of 180 consecutive children (mean age, 15.1 ± 7.7 months). The sedation group had a marginally higher success rates than the restraint group (93.8% vs. 85.1%, p = 0.056). The success rate was not significantly different between the two groups in children aged <12 months (90.9% vs. 93.1%, p = 0.739), but it was significantly higher in the sedation group (94.7% vs. 77.8%. p = 0.006) in children aged ≥12 months. Inhalation sedation was the most potent factor associated with success (adjusted odds ratio = 5.56, 95% confidence interval = 1.33–23.13, p = 0.018) in children aged ≥12 months. There were no surgical or sedation-related complications intra- and postoperatively. Inhaled sevoflurane sedation resulted in more successful, controlled, painless probing, particularly in children aged ≥12 months. It represents a safe, efficient alternative to general anesthesia.

Office- or Facility-Based Probing for Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology

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.

Outcome of Primary Probing for Simple Membraneous Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction in Children Older Than 4 Years

PURPOSE

To report outcomes of nasolacrimal duct (NLD) probing in children 4 years and older with simple membranous NLD obstruction.

METHODS

The records of all patients 4 years and older with congenital NLD obstruction who underwent surgery from 1997 to 2015 at Washington University School of Medicine were retrospectively reviewed. Of 47 patients reviewed, 18 (38.3%) were found to have simple membranous obstructions and were included in this study. Simple membranous obstruction was present at the distal duct and was relieved with passage of the probes in all patients. Children with canalicular or diffuse distal NLD stenosis (as defined by a tight, gritty feeling or multiple obstructions when passing the probe through the bony portion of the NLD), trisomy 21, lacrimal trauma, or craniofacial abnormalities were excluded. A successful outcome was determined by resolution of epiphora and periocular crusting.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients with ages ranging from 4.1 to 10.6 years with simple membranous NLD obstruction were treated. Sixteen of 18 (88.9%) patients had good outcomes following NLD probing. Two patients had persistent symptoms that resolved following balloon dilation and stent placement.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that the success rate of probing in older patients with simple membranous NLD obstruction was comparable to that of younger patients. NLD probing alone is a good treatment option for older children with simple membranous NLD obstruction. Additional procedures such as balloon catheter dilation or stent placement may not be necessary at the time of initial probing. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2020;57(1):44-47.].

Efficacy of Office-Based Nasolacrimal Duct Probing

PURPOSE

To analyze the efficacy of nasolacrimal duct probing conducted in the office for nasolacrimal duct obstruction.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted of 1,294 patients. Of those, 1,227 patients who underwent office-based nasolacrimal probings of the nasolacrimal duct at a single tertiary care center were included.

RESULTS

A total of 82 (6.7%) patients needed reprobing. Of the 82 patients who underwent a second procedure, 35 (43%) underwent a second in-office probing with a success rate of 77%. The 8 (22%) patients who failed the second in-office probing underwent probing and Crawford stent placement in the operating room and their symptoms resolved. For the 47 (57%) patients who failed the primary in-office probing and underwent operating room probing and stent placement, only 1 (2%) needed a second operating room probing and stent placement. Logistic regression analyses indicated an increased likelihood of needing a secondary procedure with increased age at the time of the first probing.

CONCLUSIONS

This large, retrospective analysis of office-based probings demonstrated a success rate of 93.3% with increased likelihood of not needing a second procedure with probing at a younger age. This study demonstrates an excellent success rate for in-office probings for patients both younger and older than 12 months. This not only shows a high rate of efficacy, but is also highly cost efficient when compared to primary probing in the operating room. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2019;56(1):50-54.].

Probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction

BACKGROUND

Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO) is a common condition causing excessive tearing in the first year of life. Infants present with excessive tearing or mucoid discharge from the eyes due to blockage of the nasolacrimal duct system, which can result in maceration of the skin of the eyelids and local infections, such as conjunctivitis, that may require antibiotics. The incidence of nasolacrimal duct obstruction in early childhood ranges from 5% to 20% and often resolves without surgery. Treatment options for this condition are either conservative therapy, including observation (or deferred probing), massage of the lacrimal sac and antibiotics, or probing the nasolacrimal duct to open the membranous obstruction at the distal nasolacrimal duct. Probing may be performed without anesthesia in the office setting or under general anesthesia in the operating room. Probing may serve to resolve the symptoms by opening the membranous obstruction; however, it may not be successful if the obstruction is due to a bony protrusion of the inferior turbinate into the nasolacrimal duct or when the duct is edematous (swollen) due to infection such as dacryocystitis. Additionally, potential complications with probing include creation of a false passage and injury to the nasolacrimal duct, canaliculi and puncta, bleeding, laryngospasm, or aspiration.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register (2016, Issue 8); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 30 August 2016); Embase.com (1947 to 30 August 2016); PubMed (1948 to 30 August 2016); LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database; 1982 to 30 August 2016), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), last searched 14 August 2014; ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov), searched 30 August 2016; and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en), searched 30 August 2016. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared probing (office-based or hospital-based under general anesthesia) versus no (or deferred) probing or other interventions (observation alone, antibiotic drops only, or antibiotic drops plus massage of the nasolacrimal duct). We did not include studies that compared different probing techniques or probing compared with other surgical procedures. We included studies in children aged three weeks to four years who may have presented with tearing and conjunctivitis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion and independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias for the included studies. We analyzed data using Review Manager software and evaluated the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified two RCTs and no ongoing studies; one of the included RCTs was registered. The studies reported on 303 eyes of 242 participants who had unilateral or bilateral congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. For both included studies, the interventions compared were immediate office-based probing to remove the duct obstruction versus deferred probing, if needed, after 6 months of observation or once the child reached a certain age.The primary outcome of the review, treatment success at 6 months, was reported partially in one study. Treatment success was not reported at this time point for all children in the immediate probing group; however, 77 of 117 (66%) eyes randomized to deferred probing had resolved without surgery 6 months after randomization and 40 (34%) eyes did not resolve without probing. For children who had unilateral NLDO, those randomized to immediate probing had treatment success more often than those who were randomized to deferred probing (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.78; 163 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Treatment success for all children was assessed in the study at age 18 months; as an ad hoc analysis in the included study, results were presented separately for children with unilateral and bilateral NLDO (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.28 and RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.06, respectively; very low-certainty evidence).In the other small study (26 eyes of 22 children), more eyes that received immediate probing were cured within one month after surgery compared with eyes that were randomized to deferred probing and analyzed at age 15 months (RR 2.56, 95% CI 1.16 to 5.64). We considered the evidence to be low-certainty due to imprecision from the small study size and risk of bias concerns due to attrition bias.One study reported on the number of children that required reoperation; however, these data were reported only for immediate probing group. Nine percent of children with unilateral NLDO and 13% with bilateral NLDO required secondary procedures.One study reported cost-effectiveness of immediate probing versus deferred probing. The mean cost of treatment for immediate probing was less than for deferred probing; however, there is uncertainty as to whether there is a true cost difference (mean difference USD -139, 95% CI USD -377 to 94; moderate-certainty evidence).Reported complications of the treatment were not serious. One study reported that there were no complications for any surgery and no serious adverse events, while the other study reported that bleeding from the punctum occurred in 20% of all probings.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects and costs of immediate versus deferred probing for NLDO are uncertain. Children who have unilateral NLDO may have better success from immediate office probing, though few children have participated in these trials, and investigators examined outcomes at disparate time points. Determining whether to perform the procedure and its optimal timing will require additional studies with greater power and larger, well-run clinical trials to help our understanding of the comparison.

Office probing for treatment of nasolacrimal duct obstruction in infants

PURPOSE

To determine whether demographic or clinical factors are associated with the outcome of office-based nasolacrimal duct probing for the treatment of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO).

METHODS

In two multicenter prospective studies, 384 eyes of 304 children aged 6 to <15 months with NLDO underwent a nasolacrimal duct probing performed in the office using topical anesthesia. Treatment success, defined as no clinical signs of NLDO (epiphora, increased tear lake, or mucous discharge) and no reoperation, was assessed 1 month after probing in one study and 6 months after probing in the other study. Data from both studies were pooled to evaluate associations between baseline characteristics and treatment success.

RESULTS

Office probing was successful in 75% of eyes overall (95% CI, 70%-80%). The procedure was less successful in eyes of children with bilateral NLDO compared with unilateral NLDO (63% vs 80%; relative risk = 0.78 [95% CI, 0.66-0.92]) and in eyes that had 2 or 3 clinical signs of NLDO compared with one (71% vs 83%; relative risk = 0.88 [95% CI, 0.81-0.96]). Treatment success did not appear to be related to age, specific clinical signs of NLDO, prior treatment, or research study.

CONCLUSIONS

Performing nasolacrimal duct probing in the office successfully treats NLDO in the majority of cases in children aged 6 to <15 months. The success rate is lower with bilateral disease or when more than one clinical sign of NLDO is present.