Comparative efficacy of treatment modalities for idiopathic canalicular inflammatory disease: A prospective study.

Authors

Vasily D Yartsev, Kristina K Kulish, Eugenia L Atkova

Published in

European journal of ophthalmology. Pages 11206721261470974. Aug 17, 2026. Epub Aug 17, 2026.

Abstract

BackgroundIdiopathic Canalicular Inflammatory Disease (ICID) lacks evidence-based management. We compared the long-term efficacy of four treatment modalities using anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) as an objective biomarker.Materials and methodsProspective randomized study included 52 patients (87 eyes) with ICID allocated to topical corticosteroids, cyclosporine A (Cs A), monocanalicular intubation, and combined therapy (intubation + Cs A). Evaluations included the Munk scale, punctal size, and AS-OCT morphometry at baseline, post-treatment, and at 6-12 months of follow-up.ResultsCs A monotherapy demonstrated the most stable functional outcome; the median Munk score decreased significantly and remained sustained at 6-12 months (72.7% success; median recurrence 473 days). Intubation yielded superior short-term anatomical results, but showed functional regression after extubation. Combined therapy demonstrated poor efficacy (0% success at 6-12 months; median recurrence 93 days), likely due to the stent-induced limitation of Cs A exposure. AS-OCT identified canalicular lumen diameter and punctal epithelial thickness as independent predictors of success. Conventional clinical scales have shown insufficient sensitivity compared to AS-OCT.Conclusion.Prolonged Cs A monotherapy provides superior long-term outcomes compared with mechanical interventions, supporting an anti-inflammatory approach. AS-OCT morphometry is a sensitive tool for predicting the treatment success. Combined therapy with simultaneous stent placement and Cs A should be reconsidered because of counterproductive mechanical barrier effects.

PMID:
42606182
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 17 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.