ArticleCureus2025
Diagnostic Accuracy of the Fluorescein Efflux Test for Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the fluorescein efflux test (FET) for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO).
methodsWe conducted a retrospective diagnostic accuracy study at a tertiary eye care center from September 2020 to December 2021. The study comprised 120 eyes from 97 patients aged <6 years suspected of CNLDO. After undergoing ophthalmologic examination, patients received both the fluorescein disappearance test (FDT) and FET. Dacryoendoscopy, syringing, and clinical findings served as reference standards. We differentiated between complete and partial lacrimal duct obstruction (LDO) by categorizing completely blocked cases as c-LDO. The primary outcome measured was the sensitivity and specificity of FET for CNLDO, with secondary outcomes focusing on sensitivity and specificity for c-LDO.
resultsOf the 120 eyes, 102 eyes qualified for CNLDO diagnosis and 102 eyes for c-LDO diagnosis. FET demonstrated a sensitivity of 77% (95% CI: 68-85) and specificity of 33% (13-59) for CNLDO. Regarding c-LDO, FET showed a sensitivity of 86% (78-92) and a specificity of 83% (59-96).
conclusionsThe diagnostic accuracy of FET was lower in patients clinically diagnosed with CNLDO compared to those with c-LDO, as some patients did not exhibit true obstruction of the distal nasolacrimal duct. FET demonstrates high diagnostic accuracy for c-LDO and may assist in diagnosing lacrimal duct patency in children. It may also help exclude conditions other than lacrimal duct obstruction in pediatric patients presenting with epiphora and eye discharge.
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.