Outcomes of Lacrimal Sac Hydrostatic Pressure Application in Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction in Infants: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO) is a common ocular disorder in infants characterized by persistent epiphora and mucopurulent discharge caused by blockage of the nasolacrimal duct. Although many cases resolve spontaneously within the first year of life, conservative management is usually recommended as the initial treatment. Lacrimal sac hydrostatic pressure application (HPA), a physician-performed pressure technique, has been proposed as an effective office-based intervention to relieve obstruction and accelerate symptom resolution.
Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lacrimal sac hydrostatic pressure application as a conservative treatment for infants with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction.
Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 179 infants (261 eyes) diagnosed with CNLDO who underwent HPA performed by a pediatric ophthalmologist. The procedure involved applying controlled downward pressure over the lacrimal sac to generate hydrostatic force within the nasolacrimal duct. Treatment success was defined as complete resolution of epiphora and/or mucopurulent discharge within 48 hours after the procedure. Patients were followed with a mean follow-up duration of 11.6 ± 13 months, and statistical analyses including logistic regression were used to determine predictors of success.
Results: Complete resolution after the first HPA occurred in 102 eyes (39.1%). Infants aged ≤6 months had significantly higher success compared with older infants (43.7% vs 30.9%, p = 0.04). Younger age was a significant predictor of success. A second HPA resulted in additional resolution in 12 eyes (26.1%) without major complications.
Conclusion: Lacrimal sac hydrostatic pressure application is a safe, practical, and effective conservative treatment for CNLDO, particularly in infants younger than six months, and may reduce the need for surgical intervention.

Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction

1. MacEwen, C. J., & Young, J. D. H. (1991). Epiphora during the first year of life. Eye, 5(5), 596-600. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Sathiamoorthi, S., Frank, R. D., & Mohney, B. G. (2019). Incidence and clinical characteristics of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 103(4), 527-529. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Young, J. D., & MacEwen, C. J. (1997). Fortnightly review: Managing congenital lacrimal obstruction in general practice. Bmj, 315(7103), 293-296. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Young, J. D., & MacEwen, C. J. (1997). Fortnightly review: Managing congenital lacrimal obstruction in general practice. Bmj, 315(7103), 293-296. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Vagge, A., Ferro Desideri, L., Nucci, P., Serafino, M., Giannaccare, G., Lembo, A., & Traverso, C. E. (2018). Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (CNLDO): a review. Diseases, 6(4), 96. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Lorena, S. H. T., Silva, J. A. F., & Scarpi, M. J. (2013). Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction in premature children. Journal of Pediatric Ophthalmology & Strabismus, 50(4), 239-244. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Sathiamoorthi, S., Frank, R. D., & Mohney, B. G. (2018). Spontaneous resolution and timing of intervention in congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. JAMA ophthalmology, 136(11), 1281-1286. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Nucci, P., Capoferri, C., Alfarano, R., & Brancato, R. (1989). Conservative management of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Journal of Pediatric Ophthalmology & Strabismus, 26(1), 39-43. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Sasaki, T., Matsumura, N., Miyazaki, C., Kamao, T., Yokoi, N., Fujimoto, M., ... & Committee for Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction Clinical Guideline. (2024). Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: clinical guideline. Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology, 68(4), 367-388. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Heichel, J. (2024, October). Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction–early diagnosis and graded therapeutic approach as key points for successful management. In Seminars in Ophthalmology (Vol. 39, No. 7, pp. 510-520). Taylor & Francis. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hu, K., Patel, J., & Patel, B. C. (2020). Crigler Technique for Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Crigler, L. W. (1923). The treatment of congenital dacryocystitis. Journal of the American Medical Association, 81(1), 23-24. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Crigler, L. W. (1923). The treatment of congenital dacryocystitis. Journal of the American Medical Association, 81(1), 23-24. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Karti, O., Karahan, E., Acan, D., & Kusbeci, T. (2016). The natural process of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction and effect of lacrimal sac massage. International ophthalmology, 36(6), 845-849. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Bansal, O., Bothra, N., Sharma, A., Walvekar, P., & Ali, M. J. (2021). Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction update study (CUP study): Paper I—Role and outcomes of Crigler’s lacrimal sac compression. Eye, 35(6), 1600-1604. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Lekskul, A., Preechaharn, P., Jongkhajornpong, P., & Wuthisiri, W. (2022). Age-specific outcomes of conservative approach and probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Clinical Ophthalmology, 1821-1828. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Nanda, D., & Sarkar, M. (2022). Efficacy of lacrimal sac massage in management of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction in infants: an observational study of 853 cases from a single institute of Eastern Asia. Middle East African Journal of Ophthalmology, 29(4), 216-219. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Srivastava, P., & Srivastava, N. (2023). A non-surgical conservative management of congenital dacryostenosis. Int. J. Community Med. Public Health, 10, 1459-1463. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Asano, M., Takeuchi, M., Ohno, T., Nakamura, J., Mizuki, N., & Matsumura, N. (2024). Lacrimal sac massage for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 108(9), 1281-1285. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Stolovitch, C., & Michaeli, A. (2006). Hydrostatic pressure as an office procedure for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Journal of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, 10(3), 269-272. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Hareendran, H., Allapitchai, F., Ravindran, M., Shukul, K., & Rengappa, R. (2022). Anisometropia and refractive status in children with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction—a prospective observational study. Journal of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, 26(2), 76-e1. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Saleem, A. A., Siddiqui, S. N., Wakeel, U., & Asif, M. (2018). Anisometropia and refractive status in children with unilateral congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Taiwan Journal of Ophthalmology, 8(1), 31-35. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Vagge, A., Tulumello, C., Pellegrini, M., Di Maita, M., Iester, M., & Traverso, C. E. (2020). Amblyopia risk factors in newborns with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Journal of Pediatric Ophthalmology & Strabismus, 57(1), 39-43. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Sims, D. T., Gillette, T. B., Lam, J. G., Liu, D., Lee, C., Ding, L., ... & Cabrera, M. T. (2024). Anisometropia and amblyopia outcomes in early versus late resolution of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction in older infants. Ophthalmic Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, 40(1), 39-42. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Measuring Waste of Patient Time in Health Care at Non-Digitized Hospital: An Observational Study in Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University, Bangladesh
• Reaffirming Clinical Confidence in Atorvastatin Therapy: A Digital Outreach Case Study from Tamil Nadu, India
• Clinical Manifestations and Therapeutic Response in a Patient with Hypothyroidism: A Case Report
• Eranda (Ricinus Communis) In Gridhrasi (Sciatica): Classical Rationale, Pharmacology and Clinical Evidence- A Narrative Literature Review
• Magnetotherapy in Pain Management: Mechanisms, Clinical Applications, and Future Perspectives – A Review