Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Punctoplasty combined with lacrimal stenting versus lacrimal stenting for punctal stenosis

Eye volume 35, pages 2054–2055 (2021)Cite this article

Subjects

This is a preview of subscription content

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

Buy

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. Goldberg H, Priel A, Zloto O, Koval T, Varkel L, Ben Simon GJ. Kelly punch punctoplasty vs. simple punctal dilation, both with mini-monoka silicone stent intubation, for punctal stenosis related epiphora. Eye Lond Engl. 2020. [Epub ahead of print].

  2. Murdock J, Lee WW, Zatezalo CC, Ballin A. Three-Snip Punctoplasty Outcome Rates and Follow-Up Treatments. Orbit Amst Neth. 2015;34(Jun):160–3.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ali MJ, Ayyar A, Naik MN. Outcomes of rectangular 3-snip punctoplasty in acquired punctal stenosis: is there a need to be minimally invasive? Eye Lond Engl. 2015;29:515–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wong ES, Li EY, Yuen HK. Long-term outcomes of punch punctoplasty with Kelly punch and review of literature. Eye Lond Engl. 2017;31:560–5.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ali MJ. Prolonged retained intracanalicular mini-monoka stent mimicking a canalicular concretion. Orbit Amst Neth. 2020;1:1–2. [Epub ahead of print].

  6. Anastas CN, Potts MJ, Raiter J. Mini Monoka silicone monocanalicular lacrimal stents: subjective and objective outcomes. Orbit Amst Neth. 2001;20:189–200.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Alam MS, Mehta NS, Mukherjee B. Anatomical and functional outcomes of canalicular laceration repair with self retaining mini-MONOKA stent. Saudi J Ophthalmol J Saudi Ophthalmol Soc. 2017;31:135–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Samimi DB, Ediriwickrema LS, Bielory BP, Miller D, Lee W, Johnson TE. Microbiology and biofilm trends of silicone lacrimal implants: comparing infected versus routinely removed stents. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;32:452–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Adnexal Service, Moorfields Eye Hospital, City Road, London, EC1V 2PD, UK

    Michelle A. J. Ting & Kaveh Vahdani

Authors
  1. Michelle A. J. Ting
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kaveh Vahdani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michelle A. J. Ting.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ting, M.A.J., Vahdani, K. Punctoplasty combined with lacrimal stenting versus lacrimal stenting for punctal stenosis. Eye 35, 2054–2055 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-020-0999-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-020-0999-5

Search

Advanced search

Quick links