biostudies-literaturePediatric Eye Disease Investigator GroupNEI NIH HHS1525-33https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC3537230biostudies-literatureUnknown130(12)<h4>Objective</h4>To compare the cost-effectiveness of 2 approaches for treating unilateral nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO).<h4>Methods</h4>One hundred sixty-three infants aged 6 to less than 10 months with unilateral NLDO were randomly assigned to receive immediate office-based nasolacrimal duct probing (n = 82) or 6 months of observation/nonsurgical management (n = 81) followed by probing in a facility for persistent symptoms.<h4>Main outcome measures</h4>Treatment success was defined as the absence of clinical signs of NLDO (epiphora, increased tear lake, mucous discharge) on masked examination at age 18 months. Cost of treatment between randomization and age 18 months included costs for all surgical procedures and medications.<h4>Results</h4>In the observation/deferred facility-prArchives of ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960)A randomized trial comparing the cost-effectiveness of 2 approaches for treating unilateral nasolacrimal duct obstruction.PMC3537230U10 EY011751EY018810U10 EY018810EY011751Costa CPeyton WMerrill KSLester LATrythall CLCagnina-Morales CMCassady CMRogers GLMcMurtrey JBryant CRTychsen LScheiman MMar NXde Melo AILeckemby GLBeck RWHaskins KJColetta JBYoon-Huang GHMorrison DFranklin CCShainberg MJBothun EDFellows RRMcMillin MCPhelps DLEverett DFBremer DLHodde RMGoldblum TALazar ELSummers CLaRiviere SSFoster NCMelia MKulp MTFraine LAJackson JLGiansanti SMOrge FHSingman ELKaddy JMEnyedi LHolleschau AMMelia BKarlsson VXHogue KMPoff SRutstein RMatta NSPetersen DBClausius DAMcGregor MLLee KAWagner AJRobb RADe La Rosa JMSchoeck SEBrendez JABiernacki RJWeisberg OLDias CLSchweinler BRDonahue QLee SVRepka MXTicho BHCotter SAMarinaro JAWallace DKBaker JDTien DRDiamond ERAlfaro AHuston PAColon BJPlum LWBirch EERinehart TMHoover DLFang CCChristian MLDavis BSilbert DIMorse CLImler BCTraboulsi EBailey CMZhang XWRogers DLCrowe SWKraker RTGolden RPLambert SRWeakley DRAtkinson SFimbel BPLenhart PDPavlica MRMoke PSHendrickson ABVaswani RSCox RERojas DEClark LEDiener- West MMcGuinness MBW RHolmes JMZeto VLChristiansen SSala NAFrick KDHutchinson AKKhammar AJCouser NLMorrison DGMiller AMSaunders RAVentura GGDe Becker IBacal DRychwalski PJAvallone JMDobson VPediatric Eye Disease Investigator GroupHuston PChandler DLCrouch ERfalseA randomized trial comparing the cost-effectiveness of 2 approaches for treating unilateral nasolacrimal duct obstruction.<h4>Objective</h4>To compare the cost-effectiveness of 2 approaches for treating unilateral nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO).<h4>Methods</h4>One hundred sixty-three infants aged 6 to less than 10 months with unilateral NLDO were randomly assigned to receive immediate office-based nasolacrimal duct probing (n = 82) or 6 months of observation/nonsurgical management (n = 81) followed by probing in a facility for persistent symptoms.<h4>Main outcome measures</h4>Treatment success was defined as the absence of clinical signs of NLDO (epiphora, increased tear lake, mucous discharge) on masked examination at age 18 months. Cost of treatment between randomization and age 18 months included costs for all surgical procedures and medications.<h4>Results</h4>In the observation/deferred facility-pr2012-01-01T00:00:00Z2012 Dec2025-04-18T18:02:59.831Z2019-03-27T01:02:39ZS-EPMC35372302322969310.1001/archophthalmol.2012.2853