Randomized Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of the Nanodropper Device for Pupillary Dilation and Cycloplegia in Children

Abstract

Purpose: We evaluated the noninferiority of 10.4 μl of eye drops eluted with a commercially available eye drop adapter, the Nanodropper (Nanodropper, Inc), on pupillary dilation and cycloplegia in children compared with the standard of care (SOC), 50 μl of eye drops.

Design: Prospective randomized trial.

Participants: Pediatric patients scheduled for routine pupillary dilation at the University of California, San Francisco, at the Pediatric Ophthalmology Clinic were enrolled. Each participant provided 1 eye for the intervention group (Nanodropper) and 1 eye for the control group (SOC).

Methods: Participants were randomized to receive small-volume dilating drops in 1 eye (Nanodropper) and SOC dilating drops in the other eye. Dilation was performed using 1 drop each of 1% cyclopentolate, 1% tropicamide, and 2.5% phenylephrine. Refraction and pupillometry were obtained before and 30 minutes after dilation. A noninferiority analysis was performed to assess change from before to after dilation in spherical equivalent and in pupil constriction percentage and maximum pupil diameter after dilation.

Main outcome measures: Spherical equivalent, maximum pupil diameter, and pupil constriction percentage.

Results: One hundred eyes of 50 patients were included, with a mean ± standard deviation age of 9 ± 3 years. After controlling for baseline measurements, the spherical equivalent after dilation was 0.05 diopter (D) more (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.28 to 0.37 D) in the Nanodropper arm, which did not achieve noninferiority. Maximum pupil diameter after dilation was lower in the Nanodropper group (mean, -0.01 mm; 95% CI, -0.20 to -0.03), which did achieve noninferiority. Constriction percentage after dilation was 0.57 percentage points more (95% CI, -1.38 to 2.51 percentage points) in the Nanodropper group, which did not achieve noninferiority.

Conclusions: Administration of eye drops using a small-volume adapter demonstrated similar efficacy to SOC in a pediatric population. Strict noninferiority was met only for pupillary dilation and not for cycloplegia or constriction percentage; however, the small differences in the effect of the Nanodropper versus SOC on all primary outcomes were not clinically significant. We conclude that small-volume eye drops have the potential to decrease unnecessary medical waste and medication toxicity while maintaining therapeutic effect.

Financial disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Keywords: Cycloplegia; Dilation; Eye drops; Health care utilization.