An observational study in Nasolacrimal Duct Obstruction and Nasolacrimal Tract Obstruction, sponsored by University of Arkansas. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-11.
Sponsored by University of Arkansas · Observational
This study is designed to compare two methods for performing a nasal endoscopic examination used in the evaluation of excessive watering or tearing of the eyes. The purpose of the study is to determine whether a new, smaller, modified camera system can produce images of the inside of the nose that are as clear and useful as those produced by the standard endoscopic camera system currently used in clinics.
The study seeks to answer the question of whether a compact, easy-to-store camera system can provide similar diagnostic image quality to the traditional, larger tower-based system. The clinical steps of the nasal examination remain the same; the only difference is the type of camera system used to capture the images.
This study evaluates two imaging systems used during routine nasal endoscopy performed for assessment of epiphora and related nasolacrimal or sinonasal concerns. The protocol involves conducting a standard nasal endoscopic examination with the conventional full-size tower-mounted camera system typically utilized in ophthalmology and otolaryngology outpatient settings, followed by a second examination using a modified compact camera system. Both examinations use the same endoscope and follow identical clinical steps.
The modified camera system attaches at the usual hand-position point on the endoscope and is designed to reduce equipment footprint, increase portability, and simplify storage. The second examination adds an estimated 3-5 minutes to the clinical encounter and does not introduce additional maneuvers or diagnostic procedures.
The primary objective is to compare image quality between the standard system and the compact system. Secondary objectives include assessments of device usability, handling characteristics, and overall feasibility of integrating the compact system into routine clinical workflow.
This evaluation aims to determine whether the compact camera system can provide imaging performance comparable to the traditional tower-based system while offering potential operational benefits. These benefits may include improved flexibility in space-constrained environments, reduced dependence on fixed equipment, and expanded opportunities for nasal endoscopy in clinics with limited infrastructure. Findings may inform future decisions regarding endoscopic equipment selection across various clinical settings.
34 studies on the registry are indexed under Lacrimal Duct Obstruction; 6 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 22 is below the median of 97 across 10 observational studies indexed under Lacrimal Duct Obstruction.
Browse Lacrimal Duct Obstruction studies →University of Arkansas is the lead sponsor of 391 studies on the registry; 39 are open to participants now.
Of its 37 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 34 (92%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Adults receiving care in the ophthalmology or otolaryngology outpatient clinics at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS) who present with sinonasal or lacrimal tearing symptoms and require nasal endoscopic evaluation as part of routine clinical care. Potential participants will be identified only during their scheduled clinic visits, and no individuals will be contacted in advance. Eligibility confirmation will be based solely on information already available in the medical record during standard outpatient workflow. Individuals who meet eligibility will be approached in person during the clinic visit and invited to participate.
Exclusion Criteria
Device: Modified Portable Endoscopic Camera
The Sony Action Camera was modified to allow direct coupling with a standard rigid nasal endoscope: 1. The native 180° wide-angle lens was replaced with a narrow-field 31° lens, enabling full-frame capture of the endoscopic image without peripheral distortion. 2. The camera housing was adapted by attaching a ¾-inch water pipe end connector, serving as a secure and stable mount for the endoscope eyepiece. The modified system captures both video and still images.
Image Quality Score of Modified Portable Endoscopic Camera System
Image quality of the modified portable endoscopic camera system will be evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale assessing resolution, clarity of anatomical structures, and overall clinical utility. Three attending physicians will independently grade anonymized images from each nasal anatomical site. Scores will be compared with those obtained from the standard endoscopic tower.
Time frame: Grading completed within 3 months of enrollment completion.
Image Quality Score of Standard Endoscopic Tower System
Image quality of the standard endoscopic tower will be evaluated using the same 5-point Likert grading scale and process applied to the modified system. These scores will serve as the comparator for paired analysis.
Time frame: Grading completed within 3 months of enrollment completion.
Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.
This study is completed, as verified in Aug 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of Arkansas