ArticleJournal of ophthalmic & vision research2014
Success rate of probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction at various ages.
Article in Journal of ophthalmic & vision research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Success Rate of the Primary Probing in Pediatric Patients with Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction in Different Age Groups.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical Implication of Dacryoendoscopy in the Patients with Tearing: A Systematic Review.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2023Pooled it
- Probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologiaPooled it
- Nasolacrimal balloon dacryoplasty versus nasolacrimal bi-canalicular intubation for the management of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction with a previous failed probing or intubation: a retrospective study.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Developmental anatomy of the lacrimal sac fossa and nasolacrimal canal: a CT study of paediatric patients.Eye (London, England) · 2026Observational
- Article
- Assessment of Office-Based Probing with Dacryoendoscopy for Treatment of Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction: A Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Management of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: results of a national survey of paediatric and oculoplastic ophthalmologists.Eye (London, England) · 2021Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Inhalation Sedation during Office Probing for Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Success rates of probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction at various ages.BMC ophthalmology · 2020Article
- [Minimally invasive diagnostics and therapy of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 2017Review
- [Increased prevalence of congenital dacryostenosis following cesarean section].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 2016Article
- Success rates of dacryoendoscopy-guided probing for recalcitrant congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2016Article
- [Treatment of congenital lacrimal duct obstruction: A prospective clinical cohort study].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 2015Article
- Outcomes and comparison of nasolacrimal probing for patients older than 12 months.Therapeutic advances in ophthalmologyArticle
- Outcome of monocanalicular intubation for complex congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: the role of age.Romanian journal of ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine the success rate of probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO) in various age groups.
methodsOne hundred children (118 eyes) aged 4 to 48 months diagnosed with CNLDO were included and divided into 6 groups; group 1: infants 4-6 months of age, group 2: infants from 7 to 12 months, group 3: toddlers 13-18 months of age, group 4: older toddlers 19-24 months old, group 5: children from 25 to 36 months, and group 6: children 37-48 months of age. Probing was performed under general anesthesia in all subjects. All patients were followed at regular intervals up to 6 months postoperatively. Successful probing was documented as complete remission of symptoms 2 weeks following the procedure.
resultsThe success rate of probing was 100% (2 eyes) in group 1, 94% (47 eyes) in group 2, 84.4% (27 eyes) in group 3, 83.3% (15 eyes) in group 4, 61.5% (8 eyes) in group 5 and 33.3% (1 eye) in group 6; the overall success rate was 84.7% (100 eyes). The majority of eyes, 87.3% (103 eyes), had membranous obstruction while 12.7% (15 eyes) had firm obstruction. The success rate was 92.2% (95 eyes) in eyes with membranous obstruction and 33.3% (5 eyes) in those with firm obstruction.
conclusionProbing of the nasolacrimal duct under general anesthesia is a safe and viable option as a primary treatment modality for CNLDO. The success rate decreases with increasing age; membranous obstruction resolves in the majority of cases whereas firm obstruction has a poorer outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24982734PMC4074476W73661583What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.