{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: A major review on punctal stenosis: Part II: Updated therapeutic interventions, complications, and outcomes.
{Author}: Tawfik HA;Ali MJ;
{Journal}: Surv Ophthalmol
{Volume}: 0
{Issue}: 0
{Year}: 2024 May 23
{Factor}: 6.197
{DOI}: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2024.05.007
{Abstract}: We continue our review of on punctal stenosis by providing a detailed discussion of management modalities, their complications, and outcomes. There is a significant change in the understanding of punctal and peripunctal anatomy, puncto-canalicular junction, and the lacrimal pump mechanisms. While the snip punctoplasty procedures are still practiced, there is an increasing trend toward nonincisional procedures. The nonincisional procedures in select cases appear to be equally effective as the incisional ones. Although simple to use, punctal plugs never became the mainstay of treatment because of design issues and the inability to address the coexisting canalicular stenosis. Placing stents only in the lower punctum in cases of upper and lower punctal stenosis should be discouraged, and management needs to address punctal stenosis and not which punctum is involved. Several types of stents are used in the management of punctal stenosis, mostly based on surgeon's preference. The benefits of adjuvant mitomycin C are uncertain. In view of literature on how stent biofilms can themselves cause chronic inflammation, placing them for prolonged periods should be reviewed and debated. Enhanced understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of punctal stenosis and addressing the current controversies in management would help standardize the therapeutic interventions available in the lacrimal armamentarium.