Skip to main content
MedVellum
QuestionsVideosPricing

MedVellum

Fellowship exam preparation across every specialty: source-verified topics, questions in every format, and videos.

Product

  • Specialties
  • Questions
  • Videos
  • Exam tools
  • Pricing

Verification & policy

  • Verified register
  • Editorial policy
  • Privacy
  • Terms

Account

  • Sign in
  • Create account
  • Dashboard
  • Account & billing

© 2026 MedVellum. For education only — not a substitute for clinical judgement.

llms.txtPsychiatry LLM catalogSitemap

Paeds SAQsophthalmology

Paeds SAQs · ophthalmology

Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction — formative SAQs

Formative SAQs on congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction: recognising the white quiet watering eye with reflux on lacrimal-sac pressure, excluding congenital glaucoma, applying the conservative-first management with Crigler massage, reasoning through the probing-timing controversy, and escalating the acute dacryocystitis and neonatal dacryocystocele.

20 marks30 min2 min readVerification in progress

Target exams

RACP General PaediatricsRACP DWEMRCPCH Clinical
On this page
Study tools

Target exams

RACP General PaediatricsRACP DWEMRCPCH Clinical
Prompt
Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction across infancy

SAQ 1 (10)

A ten-week-old is brought in because the right eye has been watering for a month and is sticky in the morning, the lashes glued by a yellow crust. The watering is worse during a cold and quieter between episodes. On examination the eye is white and quiet, there is reflux of mucopurulent material on firm pressure over the lacrimal sac, the red reflex is normal and the cornea is clear and of normal diameter. The infant is otherwise well and growing. [4]

a) State the most likely diagnosis and the single most important mimic to exclude, naming the bedside features that separate them. (3 marks) [4]

b) Outline the first-line management, naming the specific technique and its frequency, and explain why topical antibiotics are not routine. (3 marks) [4]

c) Explain the probing-timing controversy, drawing on the natural history and the procedural-success data, and state when you would offer probing. (2 marks) [2] [5]

d) Describe two safety-net features that would bring the family back urgently, and explain why each is not a simple duct obstruction. (2 marks) [4]

Paediatrics Fellowship Pro

Continue reading

You have read the opening of this SAQ. The complete unit — every section and its primary-source references — is part of the Paediatrics Fellowship fellowship library.

Sign in to continueSee pricing
References4ShowHide
  1. [4]Schnall BM Pediatric nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Curr Opin Ophthalmol, 2013.PMID 23846190
  2. [2]Petris C; Liu D Probing for congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2017.PMID 28700811
  3. [5]Lekskul A; Preechaharn P; Jongkhajornpong P; et al Age-Specific Outcomes of Conservative Approach and Probing for Congenital Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction. Clin Ophthalmol, 2022.PMID 35698598
  4. [10]Harris GJ; DiClementi D Congenital dacryocystocele. Arch Ophthalmol, 1982.PMID 7138344
Paediatrics Fellowship Pro

$29/ monthor $279 / year

The complete Paediatrics Fellowship library, every exam format, one subscription.

  • Complete library for one chosen specialty
  • Timed MCQ mock exams and spaced review
  • Clinical cases & cross-table vivas
See pricingSign in
PreviousCongenital cataract and glaucoma — formative SAQsophthalmologyNextConjunctivitis and red eye — formative SAQsophthalmology