For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
9
views
80
references
 Top references
cited by
19
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      508
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction (CNLDO): A Review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO) is a common condition causing excessive tearing or mucoid discharge from the eyes, due to blockage of the nasolacrimal duct system. Nasolacrimal duct obstruction affects as many as 20% children aged <1 year worldwide and is often resolved without surgery. Available treatment options are conservative therapy, including observation, lacrimal sac massage and antibiotics, and invasive therapy. Observation, combined with conservative options, seems to be the best option in infants aged <1 year. Meanwhile, in children aged >1 year, nasolacrimal probing successfully addresses most obstructions. However, the most favorable timing for probing remains controversial. To alleviate persistent epiphora and mucous drainage that is refractory to probing, repeat probing, silicone tube intubation, balloon catheter dilation or dacryocystorhinostomy can be considered as available treatment options. Our review aims to provide an update to CNDO management protocols.

          Related collections

          Most cited references80

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Epiphora during the first year of life.

          C MacEwen, Andrew M J Young (1990)
          A cohort of 4,792 infants was observed in order to determine the incidence and natural history of epiphora during the first year of life. Evidence of defective lacrimal drainage was present in 964 (20%) at some time during the year. 95% became symptomatic during the first month of life. Spontaneous remission occurred throughout the year and 96% had resolved before the age of one. This study provides no evidence to support probing before the age of one year.
          Article 0 comments Cited 53 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Timing of initial probing and irrigation in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction.

            J Katowitz, Raymond Welsh (1987)
            A series of 427 patients with congenital dacryostenosis involving 572 eyes was seen at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. All patients were treated conservatively with antibiotics and massage prior to decision by the parents to request probing. Congenital dacryostenosis, as well as resolution of symptoms, were confirmed by clinical examination and use of a modified dye disappearance test. In 572 eyes, the success rate of initial probing was found to be 97% under 13 months of age. Over 13 months, however, the mean success rate was found to be 54.7%. When broken down into smaller age categories, a stepwise progression was observed from 76.4% between 13 and 18 months to 33.3% for patients probed after 24 months. In addition, the number and complexity of subsequent procedures appeared to increase along with the age at which the initial probing was performed. These data suggest that initial probing should be done prior to 13 months of age depending on the severity of symptoms and parent compliance with medical management.
            Article 0 comments Cited 39 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Late and very late initial probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: what is the cause of failure?

              M Kashkouli, A Kassaee, M M Parvaresh … (2003)
              To find the cure rate of late (second year of age) and very late (3-5 years of age) initial probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO) and to identify the factors contributing to the failure rate of the probing in older children. In a prospective interventional case series study, 169 eyes of 125 consecutive patients (1-5 years old) with CNLDO underwent probing under general anaesthesia. Cure was defined as absence of tearing and discharge in the affected eye. 138 eyes of 101 patients aged 13-60 months (mean 23.4 (SD 10.2)) were included. Of 15 eyes (10.8%) with complex CNLDO, 80% presented after 24 months of age (p<0.0001). The cure rate was 89% in patients 13-24 months of age and 72% after the age of 24 months (p = 0.01). It was 90.2% in the membranous and 33.3% in the complex CNLDO in both late and very late probing (p<0.0001). There was a high correlation (r = 0.97) and no significant difference between the cure rate at 1 week and final follow up. Accumulation of the complex CNLDO is the main risk factor for failure of probing in the older children. The outcome of the nasolacrimal duct probing at 1 week follow up is highly indicative of the final outcome.
              Article 0 comments Cited 28 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Diseases
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Diseases
                Journal ID (publisher-id): diseases
                Title: Diseases
                Publisher: MDPI
                ISSN (Electronic): 2079-9721
                Publication date (Electronic): 22 October 2018
                Publication date Collection: December 2018
                Volume: 6
                Issue: 4
                Electronic Location Identifier: 96
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Eye Clinic of Genoa, Department of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health (DiNOGMI), University of Genova, 16132 Genova, Italy; mc8620@ 123456mclink.it
                [2 ]IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genova, Italy
                [3 ]School of Medicine and Pharmacy, Department of Neurosciences, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health (DiNOGMI), University of Genoa, 16132 Genoa, Italy; lorenzoferrodes@ 123456gmail.com
                [4 ]University Eye Clinic San Giuseppe Hospital, University of Milan, 20162 Milano, Italy; paolo.nucci@ 123456unimi.it (P.N.); massimiliano.serafino@ 123456multimedica.it (M.S.); andrealembo1984@ 123456hotmail.com (A.L.)
                [5 ]Ophthalmology Unit, Department of Experimental Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine (DIMES), University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi Teaching Hospital, 40138 Bologna, Italy; giuseppe.giannaccare@ 123456gmail.com
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: aldo.vagge@ 123456unige.it ; Tel.: +39-010-3538491; Fax: +39-353-8494
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7232-6593
                Article
                Publisher ID: diseases-06-00096
                DOI: 10.3390/diseases6040096
                PMC ID: 6313586
                PubMed ID: 30360371
                SO-VID: 60fb3c9b-7816-4af0-bf7c-938e54838caa
                Copyright © © 2018 by the authors.
                License:

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                Date received : 30 August 2018
                Date accepted : 17 October 2018
                Categories
                Subject: Review

                Keywords: congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction,lacrimal apparatus,tears
                Data availability:
                Keywords: congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction, lacrimal apparatus, tears

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content508

                See all similar

                Cited by19

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors538

                See all reference authors