Comparative Analysis of Monocanalicular and Bicanalicular Stents in Canalicular Repair: Design, Indications, and Clinical Outcomes
Author: Francisco Calleja Casado
Base Hospital / Institution: University Clinic Hospital Valencia
ePoster presentation
Abstract ID: 25-169
Purpose
To compare the design, insertion techniques, indications, outcomes, and complication profiles of monocanalicular and bicanalicular stents in canalicular repair, based on a structured review of recent literature.
Methods
A narrative review was conducted analyzing over 25 peer-reviewed studies from 2015 to 2025, including case series, comparative trials, and expert guidelines. The most commonly used stents – Mini-Monoka®, Masterka®, LacriJet®, Crawford, Ritleng®, and pigtail stents – were examined in terms of their technical features, surgical applications, and outcomes.
Results
Monocanalicular stents are widely used for isolated canalicular lacerations and congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction, offering ease of placement and minimal nasal trauma. Bicanalicular stents remain preferred in complex injuries and dual-canaliculus involvement, providing system-wide patency. Reported anatomical success rates range from 85–95% for both types. Monocanalicular stents carry a higher risk of extrusion, particularly in children, while bicanalicular stents are associated with nasal complications and cheese-wiring. Emerging devices such as LacriJet and Masterka streamline the intubation process and show promising success rates in pediatric use.
Conclusion
Both monocanalicular and bicanalicular stents are effective tools in canalicular repair. The choice of stent should be guided by the type and extent of injury, patient age, anatomical factors, and surgeon experience. Monocanalicular stents are ideal for simple, unilateral injuries, offering ease of removal and lower morbidity. Bicanalicular intubation remains crucial in complex or bilateral injuries, providing reliable drainage through the entire lacrimal system. A tailored, evidence-based approach to stent selection can significantly enhance anatomical and functional outcomes while minimizing complications.
Additional Authors
| First name | Last name | Base Hospital / Institution |
|---|---|---|
| Elena | Gracia Rovira | University Clinic Hospital Valencia |
| Aránzazu | Caro Ortega | University Clinic Hospital Valencia |
| Amparo | Lanuza García | University Clinic Hospital Valencia |
| Antonio Miguel | Duch Samper | University Clinic Hospital Valencia |
| Gemma | Ortega Prades | University Clinic Hospital Valencia |
| Julia | Martínez Pérez | University Clinic Hospital Valencia |
| Sergio Alfredo | Maugard Tepper | University Clinic Hospital Valencia |
| Javier | Garulo Nicolás | University Clinic Hospital Valencia |
| Bárbara | Juan Ribelles | Sagunt Hospital, Sagunto, Valencia |
| Andrea | Catalá Nadal | University Clinic Hospital, Valencia |
| Sarra | Bouchoutrouch | University Clinic Hospital, Valencia |
