4 614

Cited 0 times in

Comparison of surgical outcomes of large orbital fractures reconstructed with porous polyethylene channel and porous polyethylene titan barrier implants

Authors
 Kim, Chang Yeom  ;  Jeong, Byung Jin  ;  Lee, Sang Yeul  ;  Yoon, Jin Sook 
Citation
 OPHTHALMIC PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, Vol.28(3) : 176-180, 2012 
Journal Title
OPHTHALMIC PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY
ISSN
 0740-9303 
Issue Date
2012
MeSH
Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Biocompatible Materials* ; Eye Injuries/diagnostic imaging ; Eye Injuries/surgery* ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Orbit/diagnostic imaging ; Orbital Fractures/diagnostic imaging ; Orbital Fractures/surgery* ; Polyethylene* ; Porosity ; Prostheses and Implants* ; Reconstructive Surgical Procedures* ; Retrospective Studies ; Titanium* ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed ; Vision, Binocular ; Young Adult
Keywords
Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Biocompatible Materials* ; Eye Injuries/diagnostic imaging ; Eye Injuries/surgery* ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Orbit/diagnostic imaging ; Orbital Fractures/diagnostic imaging ; Orbital Fractures/surgery* ; Polyethylene* ; Porosity ; Prostheses and Implants* ; Reconstructive Surgical Procedures* ; Retrospective Studies ; Titanium* ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed ; Vision, Binocular ; Young Adult
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the postoperative outcomes of large orbital fractures repaired with porous polyethylene (PP) channel implants (PPCIs) and PP titan barrier implants (PPTBs).

METHODS: Medical records of 42 patients who underwent surgical reconstruction for a large orbital fracture with either PPCI or PPTB were reviewed retrospectively. The degree of diplopia, determined with a binocular single vision test, and enophthalmos, measured by a Hertel exophthalmometer, was compared between 2 implant groups. Orbital volumes were calculated using CT scans and the measuring tool.

RESULTS: Of the 42 patients examined, 16 received PPCI and 26 received PPTB. No significant difference in the degree of diplopia was observed between the 2 implant groups before surgery, and 1 and 3 months after surgery (p = 0.256, 0.408, and 0.432, respectively). Preoperative average enophthalmos measuring 1.28 mm and 1.04 mm was successfully corrected to 0.19 mm and 0.25 mm 3 months after reconstruction with PPCI and PPTB, respectively. The fractured orbit volumes and nonfractured contralateral orbit volumes were 24.96 ± 2.32 cm3 and 23.18 ± 1.733 cm in the PPCI group, and 26.80 ± 2.10 cm3 and 24.13 ± 2.28 cm3 in the PPTB group, respectively. After surgery, the fractured orbit volumes significantly decreased to 23.39 ± 2.82 cm3 in the PPCI group and to 23.53 ± 1.74 cm3 in the PPTB group; these values were not significantly different from that of the nonfractured orbit (p = 0.681 for PPCI and 0.204 for PPTB).

CONCLUSIONS: Porous polyethylene channel implant and PPTB are both effective implant materials for the repair of large orbital fractures; however, PPTB has the additional benefit of not requiring screw fixation.
Full Text
http://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&AN=00002341-201205000-00005&LSLINK=80&D=ovft
DOI
22460672
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Ophthalmology (안과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Kim, Chang Yeom(김창염)
Yoon, Jin Sook(윤진숙) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8751-9467
Lee, Sang Yeul(이상열)
URI
https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/91594
사서에게 알리기
  feedback

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse

Links