Porous and nonporous orbital implants for treating the anophthalmic socket: A meta-analysis of case series studies

Schellini, Silvana Artioli; Jorge, Eliane Chaves; Sousa, Roberta Lílian Fernandes de; Burroughs, John R.; Dib, Regina El

doi:10.3109/01676830.2016.1139591

Cited by 28 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although porous implants have better integration than other alloplastic implants, they are expensive. [ 10 11 ] We used a silicon sphere due to economic reasons and the emergent situation. Although studies have noted that insertion of a larger implant could prevent enophthalmos and superior sulcus deformity, this may be associated with increased risk of implant extrusion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dermis-fat graft as treatment of early implant exposure in a postpenetrating keratoplasty patient with nontraumatic eyeball rupture

Chen

Tsai

2020

Taiwan J Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Orbital implant exposure may be the most common complication after evisceration surgery with orbital implantation. Management of implant exposure is a vital issue for oculoplastic surgeons. We present the case of a patient with nontraumatic eyeball rupture receiving dermis-fat graft after early implant exposure. The present case with multiple penetrating keratoplasty history underwent emergent evisceration and silicon sphere implantation due to nontraumatic eyeball rupture with severe uvea prolapse. The surrounding corneal tissue of the rupture aperture was almost unidentified before the operation. Deep superior sulcus syndrome and orbital implant exposure developed 2 months after the operation; hence, orbital reconstruction and dermis-fat graft transplantation were performed. Orbital reconstruction and orbital implant exposure management are discussed in the content.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dermis-fat graft as treatment of early implant exposure in a postpenetrating keratoplasty patient with nontraumatic eyeball rupture

Chen

Tsai

2020

Taiwan J Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the conjunctiva is often insufficient to cover the new implant surface and high rates of implant exposure have been reported after this procedure. [15][16][17] To avoid tense closure and subsequent implant exposure, the use of different grafts has been proposed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Autologous pericranium grafts for large orbital implants

Flores

Secondi

Rangel

2020

European Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Insufficient orbital volume in an anophthalmic socket is a major problem for the placement of an ocular prosthesis. This study reports the outcomes of the use of autologous pericranium graft in association with a large primary or secondary orbital implant in patients with a contracted socket and large orbital volume deficit. Methods: This was a retrospective single-institution study. Participants were 13 patients with contracted socket, volume deficit, and insufficient conjunctiva to cover the new implant divided into two groups, A ( n = 3) and B ( n = 10), according to the baseline condition of the socket. Surgery was primary evisceration (group A only) and placement of a large orbital implant followed by an autologous pericranium graft over the implant (groups A and B). Results: Mean follow-up duration for the patient series was 9.5 months (range 9–24). Complete epithelialization of the pericranium graft was recorded at 47.3 days of follow-up (range 33–67). No cases of implant exposure or shrinkage were noted during follow-up. Main postoperative complications were conjunctival granuloma (five patients, 38.5%), conjunctival seroma (one patient, 7.7%). All patients were satisfied with the aesthetic outcome. Conclusion: Autologous pericranial graft was effective in reconstructing the contracted socket so that the anophthalmic socket could accommodate a larger or secondary orbital implant. The efficacy of this procedure needs to be confirmed in a larger patient series.

show abstract

“…They were unable to perform meta-analysis for silicon and poly (methyl methacrylate) implants as there were only two included case series with few number of patients for each procedure. [ 8 ]…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%