A major review on punctal stenosis: Part II: Updated therapeutic interventions, complications, and outcomes.

We continue our review of on punctal stenosis by providing a detailed discussion of management modalities, their complications, and outcomes. There is a significant change in the understanding of punctal and peripunctal anatomy, puncto-canalicular junction, and the lacrimal pump mechanisms. While the snip punctoplasty procedures are still practiced, there is an increasing trend toward nonincisional procedures. The nonincisional procedures in select cases appear to be equally effective as the incisional ones. Although simple to use, punctal plugs never became the mainstay of treatment because of design issues and the inability to address the coexisting canalicular stenosis. Placing stents only in the lower punctum in cases of upper and lower punctal stenosis should be discouraged, and management needs to address punctal stenosis and not which punctum is involved. Several types of stents are used in the management of punctal stenosis, mostly based on surgeon's preference. The benefits of adjuvant mitomycin C are uncertain. In view of literature on how stent biofilms can themselves cause chronic inflammation, placing them for prolonged periods should be reviewed and debated. Enhanced understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of punctal stenosis and addressing the current controversies in management would help standardize the therapeutic interventions available in the lacrimal armamentarium.

A major review of punctal stenosis: Updated anatomy, epidemiology, etiology, and clinical presentation.

We aim to provide a detailed and updated literature review on the epidemiology, etiology, clinical presentations, histopathology, and ultrastructural features of punctal stenosis. There are inconsistencies in the definition and staging of punctal stenosis. While advanced optical coherence tomography imaging techniques have revolutionized the way the punctum and vertical canaliculi are assessed or monitored following treatment, the planes of measurement to characterize punctum anatomy need to evolve further. The current criteria for diagnosing and grading punctal stenosis are inadequate and based on empirical clinical findings. There is increasing evidence of the role of lymphocytes and myofibroblasts in the pathogenesis of punctal stenosis. There is a need for a uniform assessment of punctal stenosis and a uniform reporting of severity that would help standardize the several management options available in the lacrimal armamentarium.

Debunking the Puzzle of Eyelid Apraxia: The Muscle of Riolan Hypothesis.

PURPOSE: Apraxia of eyelid opening (AEO) has been defined by the presence of an intermittent nonparalytic bilateral loss of the volitional ability to open the eyes or to maintain the eyelids in a sustained elevated position. It is not known whether the condition represents an apraxia, a dystonia, or a freezing phenomenon, and several different nomenclatorial terms have been suggested for this condition including the so-called AEO (scAEO), blepahrocolysis, focal eyelid dystonia, and so on. The primary goal of this review is to attempt to clarify the pathogenetic mechanisms underlying scAEO as a clinical phenomenon. This review also addresses the issue of whether scAEO is part of the spectrum of blepharospasm (BSP) which includes BSP, dystonic blinks and other dystonic eyelid conditions, or whether it is a separate phenomenologically heterogeneous disease with clinical features that merely overlap with BSP. METHODS: A literature review was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE, PubMed Central (PMC), NCBI Bookshelf, and Embase for several related keywords including the terms "apraxia of eyelid opening," "pretarsal blepharospasm," "blepharocolysis," "eyelid freezing," "eyelid akinesia," "levator inhibition," "blepharospasm-plus," as well as "blepharospasm." The clinical findings in patients with scAEO who fulfilled the classic diagnostic criteria of the disease that were originally set by Lepore and Duvoisin were included, while patients with isolated blepharospasm or dystonic blinks (DB) were excluded. In addition, electromyographic (EMG) studies in patients with scAEO were reviewed in detail with special emphasis on studies that performed synchronous EMG recordings both from the levator muscle (LPS) and the pretarsal orbicularis oculi muscle (OO). RESULTS: The apraxia designation is clearly a misnomer. Although scAEO behaves clinically as a hypotonic freezing phenomenon, it also shares several cardinal features with focal dystonias. The authors broadly categorized the EMG data into 3 different patterns. The first pattern (n = 26/94 [27.6%]) was predominantly associated with involuntary discharges in the OO muscle and has been termed pretarsal blepharospasm (ptBSP). The commonest pattern was pattern no. 2 (n = 53/94 [56.38%]), which was characterized by involuntary discharges in the OO muscle, together with a disturbed reciprocal innervation of the antagonist levator muscle and is dubbed disturbed reciprocal innervation (DRI). This EMG pattern is difficult to discern from the first pattern. Pattern no. 3 (n = 15/94 [15.9%]) is characterized by an isolated levator palpebrae inhibition (ILPI). This levator silence was observed alone without EMG evidence of contractions in the pretarsal orbicularis or a disturbed reciprocal relation of both muscles. CONCLUSION: EMG evidence shows that the great majority (84%) of patients show a dystonic pattern, whereas ILPI (16%) does not fit the dystonic spectrum. The authors propose that a spasmodic contraction of the muscle of Riolan may be the etiological basis for levator inhibition in patients with ILPI. If this is true, all the 3 EMG patterns observed in scAEO patients (ptBSP, DRI, and ILPI) would represent an atypical form of BSP. The authors suggest coining the terms Riolan muscle BSP ( rmBSP ) for ILPI, and the term atypical focal eyelid dystonia ( AFED ) instead of the term scAEO, as both terms holistically encompass both the clinical and EMG data and concur with the authors' theorem.

Orbital Vascular Anomalies: A Nomenclatorial, Etiological, and Nosologic Conundrum.

PURPOSE: Vascular anomalies are a heterogeneous group of disorders that frequently present in the periorbital region. They encompass 2 broad entities: vascular tumors, which possess a proliferative endothelium, and vascular malformations, which are basically localized defects of vascular morphogenesis. The primary goal of this review was to address inaccurate or controversial terminology in the oculoplastic literature concerning orbital and periorbital vascular anomalies and to categorize these lesions in an abridged and simplified hierarchical list that adheres as much as possible to the most recent (2018) iteration for the classification of vascular lesions proposed by the International Society for the Study of Vascular Anomalies (ISSVA). The secondary goal of this review was to review and update information regarding the genetic underpinnings of vascular anomalies and the downstream signaling pathways that are subsequently affected as a result of these genetic errors. METHODS: A literature review was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE, PubMed Central, National Center for Biotechnology Information Bookshelf, and Embase for several related keywords including "vascular anomalies, vascular malformations, vascular tumors, and cavernous venous malformation," both with and without adding the keywords "eyelid," "orbital," and "periorbital." In addition, a detailed search was conducted for controversial or obsolete keywords like "cavernous hemangioma," "lymphangioma," and "varices," again in their systemic and orbital/periorbital context. RESULTS: Crucial issues in the 2018 ISSVA classification regarding the proper categorization of orbital vascular anomalies, particularly venous lesions, were critically evaluated and revised, and a regional, simplified, and abridged modification of the ISSVA 2018 classification was proposed. CONCLUSIONS: Interdisciplinary and intradisciplinary dialogue concerning orbital vascular anomalies is seriously compromised due to the lack of a unanimous agreement on terminology and the absence of a unified classification concept system. The authors recommend that oculoplastic surgeons adopt ISSVA terminology whenever technically possible and scientifically sound. However, they also propose modifying the ISSVA 2018 classification specifically to adapt to the peculiarities of vascular anomalies in the periorbital region. At present, the simplified classification proposed here is a preliminary first step towards managing patients with orbital vascular anomalies with greater diagnostic and therapeutic precision, until such time in the future when the entire genetic makeup of orbital vascular anomalies is more completely elucidated. Optimistically, this could pave the way for a more robust classification and the ultimate therapeutic cure.