Outcome of Lacrimal Canalicular Injury Repaired with Bi-Canalicular Silicone Stent

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Aug 5, 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.47191/ijpbms/v6-i8-01
Keywords:
Lacrimal canalicular injury, Bi-canalicular stents, Anatomical success, Functional success.

Main Article Content

Md. Mehedi Hasan
National Institute of Ophthalmology and Hospital, Sher-E-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka, Bangladesh,
Abdullah Al Mamun
National Institute of Ophthalmology and Hospital, Sher-E-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka, Bangladesh,
Taskin Jahan
National Institute of Ophthalmology and Hospital, Sher-E-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka, Bangladesh,
Avijit Kumar Baidya
National Institute of Ophthalmology and Hospital, Sher-E-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka, Bangladesh,
Noor Hossain Shanto
National Institute of Ophthalmology and Hospital, Sher-E-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka, Bangladesh,
Kanij Fatema
DGHS
Mohammad Abdur Rahman
National Institute of Ophthalmology and Hospital, Sher-E-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka, Bangladesh,

Abstract

Background: Lacrimal canalicular injury is a common ophthalmic emergency requiring timely surgical repair. Bi-canalicular silicone stents are widely used to maintain canalicular patency, prevent scarring, and support reepithelialization during healing. However, anatomical and functional outcomes following stent repair remain an area of ongoing investigation.


Objective: To evaluate the anatomical and functional outcomes of lacrimal canalicular lacerations repaired with bi-canalicular silicone stents.


Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted at the National Institute of Ophthalmology, Dhaka, between April 2024 and September 2025. Fifty-three patients with canalicular lacerations underwent repair using bi-canalicular silicone stents. Anatomical success was defined as patency on irrigation with a hard stop using Bowman’s probe (size 1), while functional success was defined as absence of epiphora at the latest follow-up. Patients were assessed at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively.


Results: The mean patient age was 34.5 ± 15.9 years, with 24 (45.2%) aged 18–27 years; 44 (83.0%) were male. Lower canalicular involvement was most common (67.9%). Road traffic accidents accounted for 67.9% of injuries. Anatomical success was achieved in 45 (84.9%) patients, while functional success was observed in 42 (79.2%). Anatomical success was significantly associated with lower canalicular involvement (p=0.033) and surgery within 24 hours (p<0.001). Functional success was higher among patients aged 18–27 years (p=0.003) and those operated within 24 hours (p<0.001).


Conclusion: Bi-canalicular silicone stents provide favorable outcomes in canalicular laceration repair. Early intervention and younger age significantly improve anatomical and functional success.

Article Details

How to Cite
Hasan, M. M. ., Al Mamun, A., Jahan, T., Baidya, A. K., Shanto, N. H. ., Fatema, K., & Abdur Rahman, M. (2026). Outcome of Lacrimal Canalicular Injury Repaired with Bi-Canalicular Silicone Stent . International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Bio Medical Science, 6(08), 1167–1174. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijpbms/v6-i8-01
Issue
Vol. 6 No. 08 (2026): Volume 06 Issue 08 August 2026
Section
Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

References

I. Guo X, Li Y, Zhang Y, et al. Clinical characteristics and management outcomes of canalicular lacerations. BMC Ophthalmology. 2020;20(1):286.

II. Pota S, Sharma R, Gupta A, et al. Canalicular injuries: epidemiology and outcomes in a tertiary care setting. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2025;73(2):145 151.

III. Mansour AM, Ramadan A. Etiology and management of canalicular trauma: a review. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2022;29(1):12 18.

IV. Han J, Chen W, Liu Y, et al. Early surgical repair of canalicular lacerations: outcomes and prognostic factors. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2022;260(5):1523 1530.

V. Wladis EJ, Bradley EA, Yen MT, et al. Clinical applications of monocanalicular stents in lacrimal surgery. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019;35(3):215 220.

VI. Spinelli HM, Shapiro MD, Wei LL. Bicanalicular intubation in canalicular laceration repair. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;115(1):45 52.

VII. Cho J, Kim YD, Paik JS. Silicone bicanalicular intubation for traumatic canalicular lacerations. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2008;22(4):231 235.

VIII. Han J, Li D, Xu G. Long-term outcomes of silicone stent intubation in canalicular trauma. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019;35(5):421 426.

IX. Murchison AP, Bilyk JR. Canalicular laceration repair: factors influencing success. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2014;25(5):428 433.

X. Singh M, Gautam N, Sharma R, et al. Outcomes of canalicular laceration repair with different stent types. Orbit. 2017;36(4):245 251.

XI. Alam MS, Rahman M, Hossain M, et al. Anatomical versus functional success in canalicular repair. Bangladesh J Med Sci. 2017;16(3):345 351.

XII. Ali MJ. Functional outcomes after canalicular repair: beyond anatomical patency. Saudi J Ophthalmol. 2018;32(2):95 100.

XIII. Present study data (Dhaka, Bangladesh, 2026).

XIV. Nchifor N, Ngounou F, Tchoua R, et al. Canalicular trauma: epidemiology and outcomes in Cameroon. Afr Vision Eye Health. 2025;84(1):a123.

XV. Han J, Chen W, Liu Y, et al. Canalicular laceration repair outcomes in China. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2022;260(5):1523 1530.

XVI. Mansour AM, Ramadan A. Risk factors for canalicular trauma in young adults. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2022;29(1):12 18.

XVII. Singh M, Gautam N, Sharma R, et al. Comparative study of canalicular stents. Orbit. 2017;36(4):245 251.

XVIII. Guo X, Li Y, Zhang Y, et al. Canalicular laceration epidemiology. BMC Ophthalmol. 2020;20(1):286.

XIX. Han J, Chen W, Liu Y, et al. Timing of canalicular repair and outcomes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2022;260(5):1523 1530.

XX. Mansour AM, Ramadan A. Male predominance in canalicular trauma. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2022;29(1):12 18.

XXI. Cai Y, Zhou J, Wang L, et al. Canalicular laceration repair with bicanalicular stents: large cohort outcomes. Int J Ophthalmol. 2024;17(3):412 419.

XXII. Han J, Li D, Xu G. Functional outcomes of canalicular repair with silicone stents. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019;35(5):421 426.

XXIII. Naik MN, Honavar SG, Desai S, et al. Prolonged intubation in canalicular laceration repair. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;24(5):379 384.

XXIV. Liang X, Wu W, Li Y. Long-term stent intubation for canalicular trauma. Chin Med J (Engl). 2009;122(12):1423 1427.

XXV. Murchison AP, Bilyk JR. Extended stenting in canalicular repair. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2014;25(5):428 433.

XXVI. Mansour AM, Ezzeldin M. Canalicular trauma repair outcomes in Egypt. Egypt J Ophthalmol. 2022;36(2):89 95.

XXVII. Singh M, Gautam N, Sharma R, et al. Mechanical support role of stents in canalicular repair. Orbit. 2015;34(2):123 129.

XXVIII. Ali MJ. Lacrimal pump dysfunction after canalicular repair. Saudi J Ophthalmol. 2018;32(2):95 100.

XXIX. Eo S, Kim Y, Cho S. Complications of canalicular stent intubation. Ann Plast Surg. 2010;65(5):465 469.

XXX. Lee H, Park M, Kim J. Postoperative complications in canalicular repair. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2016;30(4):289 294.

XXXI. Raj A, Sharma R, Gupta A. Canalicular trauma repair outcomes in India. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2020;68(7):1234 1240.

XXXII. Cai Y, Zhou J, Wang L, et al. Complications of canalicular stent intubation. Int J Ophthalmol. 2024;17(3):412 419.

XXXIII. Han J, Chen W, Liu Y, et al. Tube extrusion rates in canalicular repair. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2022;260(5):1523 1530.