Immediate Office Probing vs Deferred Facility Probing for Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction in Children 6 to <10 Months Old (NLD3)
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00780741|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : October 28, 2008
Results First Posted : November 12, 2012
Last Update Posted : June 24, 2016
The purpose of this study is:
To determine the cost-effectiveness of treating NLDO using immediate office probing compared with deferred probing in a facility setting. As part of the primary objective, the study will determine the proportion of eyes experiencing spontaneous resolution among subjects randomized to the deferred probing group.
The secondary objectives are:
- To determine the success proportion for eyes undergoing immediate office probing as an initial procedure.
- To determine the success proportion for eyes undergoing deferred facility probing as an initial procedure.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction||Procedure: Immediate Office Probing Procedure: Deferred Facility Probing||Phase 3|
Nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO) is a common ocular condition in the first year of life. Many cases will resolve spontaneously or with massage. Many studies of primary treatment of NLDO have been reported, however these case series have largely been retrospective, uncontrolled, and conducted in single centers. The substantial uncertainty regarding an estimate of spontaneous resolution is a primary reason for conducting the current study.
Probing is the most widely-used initial treatment for NLDO in infancy. Our group recently completed a prospective observational study which found a 78% success proportion of probing among children aged 6 to <12 months. Other estimates of the success rate for probing vary between 69% and 92%.
Two differing approaches to nasolacrimal probing have been most often been used: (1) immediate office probing (early probing - generally soon after 6 months of age) and (2) medical management (episodic antibiotic eye drops with massage of the lacrimal sac) until 9-13 months of age followed by probing under general anesthesia or conscious sedation (deferred probing). The advantages of early probing are the avoidance of general anesthesia or conscious sedation, immediate resolution of symptoms, fewer physician visits, fewer antibiotic prescriptions, lesser cost per procedure, and possible prevention of fibrosis from inflammation in the nasolacrimal duct. The advantages of deferred probing include more subject comfort with the procedure and possible avoidance of a surgical procedure completely.
The optimal approach to the management of NLDO in the first year of life remains uncertain. Our prospective observational data suggest a slightly reduced chance of success with immediate office probing (75% for office probing, 80% for facility probing), however, immediate office probing may be more cost-effective even if the proportion with success is lower. For a subject undergoing a single operation, immediate office probing is less expensive than deferred probing in a facility because there is no fee for anesthesia, the facility, or for medications prescribed during the pre-operative observation period. Some portion of this lower cost would be offset however by the additional cost of a second procedure if the initial office probing is not successful. Deferred facility probing is more expensive per procedure; however, the overall costs are reduced by the number of children whose NLDO spontaneously resolves while waiting to perform the procedure in a facility.
The study is a randomized clinical trial which aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of treating NLDO using immediate office probing compared with deferred probing in a facility setting. As part of the primary objective, the study will determine the proportion of eyes experiencing spontaneous resolution among subjects randomized to the deferred probing group.
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Actual Enrollment :||220 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||None (Open Label)|
|Official Title:||A Randomized Trial Comparing Immediate Probing in an Office Setting With Deferred Probing in a Facility Setting for Treatment of Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction in Children 6 to <10 Months Old|
|Study Start Date :||October 2008|
|Actual Primary Completion Date :||November 2011|
|Actual Study Completion Date :||January 2012|
Active Comparator: Immediate Office Probing
Probing to be performed in the office setting using topical anesthesia and infant restraint. Probing to be performed either the same day as randomization or within two weeks.
Procedure: Immediate Office Probing
Nasolacrimal duct probing in an office setting with topical anesthesia and restraint of the infant.
Active Comparator: Deferred Facility Probing
Probing to be performed in a surgical facility under general anesthesia within four weeks after completion of the 26-week visit if any of the clinical signs persist.
Procedure: Deferred Facility Probing
Nasolacrimal duct probing performed under general anesthesia in a hospital outpatient surgery center or an ambulatory surgery center.
- Proportion of Participants With Treatment Success [ Time Frame: 18 months of age ]Absence of three clinical signs of NLDO (epiphora, increased tear lake, and mucous discharge) upon masked examination at 18 months of age.
- Cost of Treatment [ Time Frame: Randomization to 18 months of age ]Total cost of treatment including the cost of an initial office consultation and all surgeries received (i.e. initial surgeries and reoperations) and medications prescribed for NLDO between randomization and the 18 months of age visit. Estimates of treatment costs were obtained primarily from the 2011 Medicare Fee Schedules.
- Months of Symptoms of Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction (NLDO) Between Randomization and 18 Months of Age [ Time Frame: Randomization to 18 months of age. ]Months of NLDO symptoms between randomization and 18 months of age. When resolution of NLDO occurred without surgery, the time of resolution was estimated as the midpoint between randomization and the first time point at which symptoms/signs were reported as absent (i.e. 3-month phone call, 6-month visit, or 18 months of age visit) without a subsequent report of symptoms/signs. For patients who underwent successful surgery, months of symptoms was estimated as months between randomization and the surgery. Patients who had clinical signs present at the 18 month of age visit were considered to have had symptoms present since randomization.
- Proportion of Deferred Facility Probing Group Participants With 6-Month Resolution of NLDO Without Surgery [ Time Frame: Randomization to 6 months ]Absence of three clinical signs of NLDO (epiphora, increased tear lake, and mucous discharge) upon unmasked examination 6 months after randomization. Participants who were operated before the 6-month visit were considered treatment failures.
- Proportion of Participants With Office Probing Success 6 Months After Randomization [ Time Frame: Randomization to 6 months ]The proportion of immediate office group participants whose office probing was successful when assessed 6 months after randomization. Office probing success was defined as absence of three clinical signs of NLDO (epiphora, increased tear lake, and mucous discharge) 6 months after randomization and no reoperation.
To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT00780741
|United States, Idaho|
|Intermountain Eye Centers|
|Boise, Idaho, United States, 83702|
|Study Chair:||Katherine A. Lee, M.D., Ph.D.||Intermountain Eye Centers|