A case series study of lacrimal canalicular laceration repair with the bi-canalicular stent

Pediatric Canalicular Lacerations: Epidemiology and Surgical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to report the epidemiology and surgical outcomes of canalicular lacerations in the pediatric age group.

METHODS

All pediatric patients who underwent repair of canalicular lacerations of any cause were included in this study. Age, sex, mechanism of trauma, and type of stent used were recorded.

RESULTS

The study group consisted of 47 patients with a median age of 6.4 years (22 mo-17 y). Thirty of the patients were male (63.8%). The lower canaliculus was affected in 76.6% (n=36), the upper canaliculus in 40.4% (n=19), and both canaliculi in 17% (n=8). The most common cause of canalicular laceration was sharp objects (n=33, 70.2%).

CONCLUSION

Canalicular laceration most commonly affects boys and especially involves the lower canaliculus. There was no difference in functional success between monocanalicular and bicanalicular stents. Prevention of canalicular lacerations should be the main focus.

Canalicular laceration repair using a novel bicanalicular silicone stent versus traditional bicanalicular stent with nasal fixation

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical effects of two types of lacrimal stents in the repair of canalicular lacerations.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with canalicular lacerations between January 2017 and December 2022. The canalicular reconstruction was performed using either the Runshi-RS bicanalicular silicone stent or the traditional bicanalicular silicone stent with nasal fixation, under a surgical microscope. The stent was placed for 3 months, and patients were followed up for more than 3 months after extubation. The anatomical and functional success rates were compared between the two groups. Anatomical success was assessed through diagnostic probing and irrigation of lacrimal passage, while functional success was determined by the patient's subjective symptoms of epiphora.

RESULTS

The study included 315 patients (315 eyes) undergoing canalicular laceration repair. The Runshi-RS stent was utilized in 147 patients (46.7%), while the traditional stent with nasal fixation was employed in 168 patients (53.3%). The anatomical success rates (99.3% vs 98.8%, P = 0.642) and functional success rates (87.2% vs 88.1%, P = 0.926) were similar between the RS group and the traditional stent group. Postoperative complications were fewer (4.1% vs 10.1%, P = 0.04) and the operation time was shorter (67.1 ± 35.3 min vs 86.1 ± 43.4 min, P < 0.001) in the RS group.

CONCLUSION

The Runshi-RS tube demonstrates favorable surgical outcomes for the repair of canalicular lacerations. Compared to the traditional stent with nasal fixation, the RS stent allows for shorter operation times and fewer postoperative complications in the repair of canalicular lacerations.

Acute and Past Common Lacrimal Canalicular Lacerations: A Report of Two Cases

Lacrimal canalicular lacerations can be caused by trauma to the ocular adnexa, such as a penetrating or blunt injury. Only a few cases involving the common canaliculus or lacrimal sac have been reported, and only a few reports have described the detailed course of treatment. Here, we report an acute case of common lacrimal canalicular laceration and a case of a previous common canalicular laceration. The acute case was treated with a bicanalicular stent directly inserted into the nasolacrimal duct. The case with a previous common canalicular laceration was treated with external dacryocystorhinostomy combined with monocanalicular stent insertion. These treatments may be appropriate for the initial surgery and can be selected before performing conjunctivodacryocystorhinostomy.