Lacrimal stenting versus three-snip punctoplasty for treatment of punctal stenosis or occlusion: an open- label, randomized clinical trial.

Abstract

To compare the short-term anatomical and functional outcomes of, as well as patient satisfaction with, lacrimal stenting and three-snip punctoplasty for the treatment of punctal stenosis or occlusion. In this open-label, randomized clinical trial, we included 50 eyes of 30 patients diagnosed with punctal stenosis or occlusion. They were randomly allocated to two groups of 25 eyes each, using central telephone randomization. Group A underwent a lacrimal stenting procedure and was subdivided into two subgroups: Group A1 (13 eyes) received polyvinylpyrrolidone-coated perforated punctal plugs, and Group A2 (12 eyes) received closed intubation using a bicanalicular silicon tube. Group B included 25 eyes that underwent three- snip punctoplasty. All eyes were examined after 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. Postoperative anatomical success assessing the punctum size, functional success using the fluorescein disappearance test (FDT), and patient satisfaction based on epiphora scoring were recorded. Both study groups were comparable in terms of sex and age distribution. Compared to Group B, Group A had a significantly larger punctum size at one, three, and 6-month postoperatively (P = 0.009, 0.01, and 0.02, respectively). The difference in FDT results was significant between the two groups at all follow-up visits (P = 0.008, 0.0001, 0.003, and 0.002, at postoperative one week, one-months, three-month, and si-month, respectively). Likewise, patient satisfaction was significantly different between both groups at all follow-up visits (P = 0.007, 0.001, 0.005, and 0.002, at postoperative one week, one-months, three-month, and si-month, respectively). Lacrimal stenting is an effective method for the treatment of punctal stenosis or occlusion. Overall, the FDT results and patient satisfaction outcomes were significantly better.