• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.35 no.1
• /
• pp.73-77
• /
• 2008

Purpose: In case of facial injury, a canalicular injury is common. Many methods and materials have been used for reconstruction of lacrimal canaliculi. Silicone tube is the most widely used material, generally with pigtail probe or stainless steel probe. But it has still many problems. The authors guess that reconstruction using Mini $Monoka^{(R)}$ will reduce those problems and will be more successful. Methods: From July, 2003 to November, 2006 in 24 patients with canalicular injury, 11 cases were recon- structed with former silicone tube and 13 cases were treated with Mini $Monoka^{(R)}$. Results: The mean follow-up period was 3 months. The results of reconstruction were classified into three groups(Normal, Fair, Poor). In 13 cases with Mini $Monoka^{(R)}$ stent, 10 cases were normal, 3 were fair, and no poor cases. But in 11 cases with bicanaliculus silicone stent, 6 cases were normal, 3 were fair, and 2 were poor. Conclusion: Compared with bicanaliculus silicone stent, Mini $Monoka^{(R)}$ stent is fixed well, has no aesthetic problems, makes less foreign body sensation. And the results were successful.

• Archives of Reconstructive Microsurgery
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.32-37
• /
• 2011

Purpose: Canalicular laceration is relatively common due to its exposed, vulnerable location in case of facial trauma. Conjunctivodacryocystorhinostomy has been the standard treatment for canalicular obstruction secondary to unrepaired canalicular laceration. In spite of a high rate of relieving tear-duct obstruction, this method is noted to be associated with low rate of patient satisfaction and a number of complications. The goal of this study is to report the good results of delayed lacrimal stent implantation with Mini Monoka$^{(R)}$ for patients whose canaliculi were not repaired by initial surgery. Methods: From May of 2005 to February of 2007, four patients who underwent delayed lacrimal stent implantation using Mini Monoka$^{(R)}$ in canalicular laceration were retrospectively reviewed. First, the previous scar incision was made over the lower lid and we identified the cut end of proximal lacerated canaliculus. The Mini Monoka$^{(R)}$ was passed through the punctum to the cut end of the proximal lacerated canaliculus. We identified the cut end of the distal lacerated canaliculus, whose cut end has rolled white edges after careful excision of the scarred lid tissue. We then passed Mini Monoka$^{(R)}$ through the lacerated inferior canaliculus. Using an operating microscope, we placed three interrupted sutures of 8-0 Ethilon to join the canalicular ends. Silicone stent was left in place for 6 months. The mean age of the patients was 48.5 years (range, 35 to 59 years). The time interval from initial trauma to delayed lacrimal stent implantation was between 3 and 31 days. Follow-up periods ranged from 12 and 20 months. Results: The results of reconstruction were classified into normal, fair and poor. Patent lacrimal drainage systems were achieved in three of the four cases. In one case, epiphora was encountered. No cases of stent displacement, conjunctivitis or granuloma formation were encountered. Conclusion: Even though canalicular reconstruction was delayed for a long time, attempting canalicular reconstruction would be acceptable before considering secondary operations like dacryocystorhinostomy and conjunctivodacryocystorhinostomy.