Trial reportScientific reports2024
Comparative efficacy of probing with or without intubation, and/or inferior turbinate fracture in simple congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lacrimal Intubation in the Management of Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction: A Prospective Comparative Study.Journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Surgical outcomes and the role of probe exit site in nasal endoscopy-guided interventions for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: a cross-sectional study.International journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Anatomic features of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: a comparative computed tomography study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Anatomical and Functional Alterations in Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction: A Comprehensive Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction: Natural Course, Diagnosis and Therapeutic Strategies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To compare the success rates of probing with or without monocanalicular intubation, and/or inferior turbinate fracture in resolving simple congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO). A randomized, double-blind clinical trial was conducted on children aged 12-36 months exhibiting symptoms of epiphora and/or mucous discharge along with a positive fluorescein dye disappearance test (DDT). Patients were randomly assigned to one of the following interventions: (1) probing; (2) probing and monocanalicular intubation; (3) probing and inferior turbinate fracture; (4) probing, inferior turbinate fracture, and monocanalicular intubation. Participants were categorized into two age groups (12-24 months and 24-36 months) and assessed for resolution of CNLDO three months post-surgery. Success was defined as the absence of epiphora or mucopurulent discharge and a negative DDT. Among the 201 participants, 51 underwent probing alone, 53 underwent probing with intubation, 47 underwent probing with turbinate fracture, and 50 underwent probing with turbinate fracture and intubation. No significant differences were observed in age, gender, or laterality of the disease between the groups (Ps > 0.05). While there was no significant difference in success rates among interventions in both age groups (Ps > 0.05), patients aged 24-36 months who underwent interventions involving intubation exhibited a significantly higher success rate compared to those without intubation (93.0% vs. 76.2%; P = 0.018). However, this difference was not observed in patients aged 12-24 months (95.7% vs. 92.9%; P = 0.551). Incorporating interventions such as intubation and/or turbinate fracture alongside conventional probing does not significantly alter the success rate of simple CNLDO resolution in children aged 12-24 months. However, older patients (24-36 months) may derive greater benefits from interventions involving intubation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.