Top

Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology

Published in:

01-06-2009 | Pediatrics

Efficacy of probing for children with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: a retrospective study using fluorescein dye disappearance test and lacrimal sac echography

Authors: Piero Steindler, Enrico Mantovani, Carlo Incorvaia, Francesco Parmeggiani

Published in: Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology | Issue 6/2009

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate B-scan echography for the assessment of lacrimal sac (LS) in pediatric epiphora secondary to congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO), and to verify its predictive role in functional efficacy of nasolacrimal duct probing.

Patients and Methods

Thirty-nine eyes of 23 consecutive children, treated with a single probing for persistent CNLDO-related epiphora, were retrospectively studied. These cases were investigated both collectively and considering two sub-groups: group A (ten patients [20 eyes] ≤13 months) and group B (13 patients [19 eyes] >13 months. Fluorescein dye disappearance test at 10 minutes (FDDT-10) and ultrasound examination of LS were performed before and after probing. An echographic LS scoring system (grade 0 = no LS enlargement; grade 1 = slight longitudinal LS enlargement; grade 2 = longitudinal and slight transverse LS enlargement; grade 3 = marked longitudinal and transverse LS enlargement) was introduced as a predictor of probing efficacy, estimating FDDT-10 modification between pre- and post-operative checks.

Results

Echographic LS evaluation was easily practicable without sedation. In the total cluster and in both age sub-groups, post-probing FDDT-10 decreased with respect to pre-probing value (p < 0.001). Post-probing LS score improved with respect to pre-probing check within the total cluster and group A (p < 0.05). Strong correlation between pre-probing LS alteration and functional probing failure was present in each studied cluster (all p values <0.0001). Within group B, a greater gain of post-probing FDDT-10 was more frequent in patients with a better pre-probing LS score, as well as in younger children (both p values <0.0001).

Conclusions

In children with CNLDO-related epiphora, B-scan echography of the LS can represent a reliable and useful examination for a better understanding of the functional prognosis after probing treatment.

MacEwen CJ, Young JD (1991) Epiphora during the first year of life. Eye 5:596–600PubMed

Robb RM (2001) Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Ophthalmol Clin North Am 14:443–446. doi:10.1016/S0896-1549(05)70242-X PubMedCrossRef

MacEwen CJ (2006) Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Compr Ophthalmol Update 7:79–87PubMed

Pashby RC, Hurwitz JJ (1996) Pediatric lacrimal disease. In: Hurwitz JJ (ed) The lacrimal system. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, pp 237–244

Piest KL, Katowitz JA (1991) Treatment of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Ophthalmol Clin North Am 4:201–209

Nucci P, Capoferri C, Alfarano R, Brancato R (1989) Conservative management of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 26:39–43PubMed

Young JD, MacEwen CJ, Ogston SA (1996) Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction in the second year of life: a multicentre trial of management. Eye 10:485–491PubMed

Schellini SA, Ferreira Ribeiro SC, Jaqueta E, Padovani CR, Padovani CR (2007) Spontaneous resolution in congenital nasolacrimal obstruction after 12 months. Semin Ophthalmol 22:71–74. doi:10.1080/08820530701331784 PubMedCrossRef

Young JD, MacEwen CJ (1997) Managing congenital lacrimal obstruction in general practice. BMJ 315:293–296PubMed

10.

Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator GroupRepka MX, Chandler DL, Beck RW, Crouch ER 3rd, Donahue S, Holmes JM, Lee K, Melia M, Quinn GE, Sala NA, Schloff S, Silbert DI, Wallace DK (2008) Primary treatment of nasolacrimal duct obstruction with probing in children younger than 4 years. Ophthalmology 115:577–584PubMedCrossRef

11.

el-Mansoury J, Calhoun JH, Nelson LB, Harley RD (1986) Results of late probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Ophthalmology 93:1052–1054PubMed

12.

Katowitz JA, Welsh MG (1987) Timing of initial probing and irrigation in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Ophthalmology 94:698–705PubMed

13.

Sturrock SM, MacEwen CJ, Young JD (1994) Long term results after probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Br J Ophthalmol 78:892–894. doi:10.1136/bjo.78.12.892 PubMedCrossRef

14.

Paul TO, Shepard R (1994) Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: natural history and the timing of optimal intervention. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 31:362–367PubMed

15.

Zwaan J (1997) Treatment of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction before and after the age of 1 year. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers 28:932–936PubMed

16.

Kushner BJ (1998) The management of nasolacrimal duct obstruction in children between 18 months and 4 years old. J AAPOS 2:57–60. doi:10.1016/S1091-8531(98)90112-4 PubMedCrossRef

17.

Robb RM (1998) Success rates of nasolacrimal duct probing at time intervals after 1 year of age. Ophthalmology 105:1307–1310. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(98)97038-5 PubMedCrossRef

18.

Mannor GE, Rose GE, Frimpong-Ansah K, Ezra E (1999) Factors affecting the success of nasolacrimal duct probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Am J Ophthalmol 127:616–617. doi:10.1016/S0002-9394(98)00432-2 PubMedCrossRef

19.

Honavar S, Vasudha EP, Rao GN (2000) Outcome of probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction in older children. Am J Ophthalmol 130:42–48. doi:10.1016/S0002-9394(00)00388-3 PubMedCrossRef

20.

Kashkouli MB, Kassaee A, Tabatabaee Z (2002) Initial nasolacrimal duct probing in children under age 5: cure rate and factors affecting success. J AAPOS 6:360–363. doi:10.1067/mpa.2002.129041 PubMedCrossRef

21.

Maheshwari R (2005) Results of probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction in children older than 13 months of age. Indian J Ophthalmol 53:49–51PubMedCrossRef

22.

Casady DR, Meyer DR, Simon JW, Stasior GO, Zobal-Ratner JL (2006) Stepwise treatment paradigm for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 22:243–247. doi:10.1097/01.iop.0000225750.25592.7f PubMedCrossRef

23.

Wallace EJ, Cox A, White P, MacEwen CJ (2006) Endoscopic-assisted probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Eye 20:998–1003. doi:10.1038/sj.eye.6702049 PubMedCrossRef

24.

Zilelioğlu G, Hoşal BM (2007) The results of late probing in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Orbit 26:1–3. doi:10.1080/01676830600972807 PubMedCrossRef

25.

Kashkouli MB, Beigi B, Parvaresh MM, Kassaee A, Tabatabaee Z (2003) Late and very late initial probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: what is the cause of failure? Br J Ophthalmol 87:1151–1153. doi:10.1136/bjo.87.9.1151 PubMedCrossRef

26.

Wobig JL (1985) Lacrimal probing complications. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 1:75–76. doi:10.1097/00002341-198501000-00013 PubMed

27.

Milder B (1980) Complications in lacrimal surgery. In: Waltman SR, Krupin T (eds) Complications in ophthalmic surgery. Lippincott, New York, pp 233–251

28.

Baker JD (1985) Treatment of congenital nasolacrimal system obstruction. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 22:34–36PubMed

29.

MacEwen CJ, Young JD, Barras CW, Ram B, White PS (2001) Value of nasal endoscopy in the diagnosis and management of children with congenital epiphora. Br J Ophthalmol 85:314–318. doi:10.1136/bjo.85.3.314 PubMedCrossRef

30.

Petersen RA, Robb RM (1978) The natural course of congenital obstruction of the nasolacrimal duct. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 15:246–250PubMed

31.

Tost F, Bruder R, Clemens S (2002) 20-MHz ultrasound of presaccular lacrimal ducts. Ophthalmologe 99:25–28. doi:10.1159/000071571 PubMed

32.

Ostendorf M, Tost F (2003) Imaging the lacrimal canaliculus with 20-MHz ultrasonography: a normal diagnosis (Part 1). J Fr Ophtalmol 26:1031–1034PubMed

33.

Tost F, Bruder R, Ostendorf M (2003) High-frequency ultrasonography applied to disorders of the lacrimal canaliculi (Part 2). J Fr Ophtalmol 26:1035–1038PubMed

34.

Hewick SA, Fairhead AC, Culy JC, Atta HR (2004) A comparison of 10 MHz and 20 MHz ultrasound probes in imaging the eye and orbit. Br J Ophthalmol 88:551–555. doi:10.1136/bjo.2003.028126 PubMedCrossRef

35.

Stupp T, Pavlidis M, Busse H, Thanos S (2004) Presurgical and postsurgical ultrasound assessment of lacrimal drainage dysfunction. Am J Ophthalmol 138:764–771. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2004.06.018 PubMedCrossRef

36.

MacEwen CJ, Young JD (1991) The fluorescein disappearance test (FDT): an evaluation of its use in infants. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 28:302–305PubMed

37.

Bowyer JD, Holroyd C, Chandna A (2001) The use of the fluorescein disappearance test in the management of childhood epiphora. Orbit 20:181–187. doi:10.1076/orbi.20.3.181.2620 PubMedCrossRef

38.

Zappia RJ, Milder B (1972) Lacrimal drainage function: 2. The fluorescein dye disappearance test. Am J Ophthalmol 74:160–162PubMed

39.

Dutton JJ (1989) Standardized echography in the diagnosis of lacrimal drainage dysfunction. Arch Ophthalmol 107:1010–1012PubMed

40.

Jedrzynski MS, Bullock JD (1994) Lacrimal ultrasonography. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 10:114–120. doi:10.1097/00002341-199406000-00008 PubMedCrossRef

41.

Korchmaros I, Szalay E (1978) Cannula-probing combined with nasal procedure for dacryocystitis neonatorum. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 56:357–362CrossRef

42.

Singh Bhinder G, Singh Bhinder H (2004) Repeated probing results in the treatment of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Eur J Ophthalmol 14:185–192PubMed

43.

O’Donnell BA, Adenis JP, Linberg JV, Rose GE, Sullivan TJ, Wobig JL (2001) The failed probing. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 29:276–280. doi:10.1046/j.1442-9071.2001.00433.x PubMedCrossRef

44.

Marr JE, Drake-Lee A, Willshaw HE (2005) Management of childhood epiphora. Br J Ophthalmol 89:1123–1126. doi:10.1136/bjo.2005.069286 PubMedCrossRef

45.

Kassoff J, Meyer DR (1995) Early office-based vs late hospital-based nasolacrimal duct probing. A clinical decision analysis. Arch Ophthalmol 113:1168–1171PubMed

46.

Becker BB (1992) Tricompartment model of the lacrimal pump mechanism. Ophthalmology 99:1139–1145PubMed

47.

Pavlidis M, Stupp T, Grenzebach U, Busse H, Thanos S (2005) Ultrasonic visualization of the effect of blinking on the lacrimal pump mechanism. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 243:228–234. doi:10.1007/s00417-004-1033-5 PubMedCrossRef

Title: Efficacy of probing for children with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: a retrospective study using fluorescein dye disappearance test and lacrimal sac echography
Authors: Piero Steindler
Enrico Mantovani
Carlo Incorvaia
Francesco Parmeggiani
Publication date: 01-06-2009
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology / Issue 6/2009
Print ISSN: 0721-832X
Electronic ISSN: 1435-702X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-008-1022-1

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Efficacy of probing for children with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: a retrospective study using fluorescein dye disappearance test and lacrimal sac echography

Abstract

Purpose

Patients and Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Patients and Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2009

Botulinum toxin A injection for primary and recurrent chalazia

Weight gain measured at 6 weeks after birth as a predictor for severe retinopathy of prematurity: study with 317 very low birth weight preterm babies

Down-regulation of inducible co-stimulator (ICOS) by intravitreal injection of small interfering RNA (siRNA) plasmid suppresses ongoing experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis in rats

Lack of association of VEGF (−2578 C → A) and ANG 2 (−35 G → C) gene polymorphisms with the progression of retinopathy of prematurity

Relationship between anterior corneal asphericity and refractive variables

The evaluation of the treatment response in obstructive meibomian gland disease by in vivo laser confocal microscopy