Comparison of Sequelae According to the Types of Implants in Blow-Out Fracture.
- Author:
Tae Gon KIM
1
;
Jong Hyo LIM
;
Jun Ho LEE
;
Yong Ha KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University, Daegu, Korea. yhkim@med.yu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Comparison of sequelae;
Implants in blow-out fracture
- MeSH:
Diplopia;
Enophthalmos;
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Muscles;
Orbit;
Orbital Fractures;
Paresthesia;
Polyethylene;
Range of Motion, Articular;
Retrospective Studies;
Titanium
- From:Journal of the Korean Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association
2009;10(1):23-28
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Blow out fracture can present tenderness, swelling, enophthalmos, extraoccular muscle limitation, paresthesia, diplopia according to severity of injury, so reconstruction of blow out fracture is important. Orbital soft tissue should be in orbit and defected orbital wall should be corrected by autologus tissue or alloplastic implants. Every implants have their merits and faults, every implants are used various. This study was designed to compare the sequelae of blow-out fracture repair using the alloplastic implants: micro-titanium mesh(Micro Dynamic titanium mesh(R) , Leibinger, Germany), porous polyethylene (Medpor(R) , Porex, USA), absorbable mesh plate(Biosorb FX(R) . Bionx Implants Ltd, Finland). METHODS: Between January 2006 and April 2008, 52 patients were included in a retrospective study analysing the outcome of corrected inferior orbital wall fracture with various kind of implants. Implants were inserted through subciliary incision. Twenty patients were operated with micro-titanium mesh, fourteen patients with porous polyethylene and eighteen patients with absorbable mesh plate. In comparative category, enophthalmos, diplopia, range of motion of extraoccular muscle, inferior orbital nerve injury were more on frequently statistically in patients. RESULTS: Fourteen of 18 patients underwent surgical repair to improve diplopia, 11 of 17 patients to improve parasthesia, 11 of 15 patients to improve enophthalmos, 8 of 9 patients to improve extraoccular muscle limitation. Duration of follow-up time ranged from 6 months to 12 months(mean, 7.4 months). There was no statistic difference of sequelae between micro titanium mesh and porous polyethylene and absorbable mesh plate in blowout fracture, inferior wall. CONCLUSION: There is no difference of sequelae between micro-titanium mesh, porous polyethylene and absorbable mesh plate in blow-out fracture, inferior wall. The other factors such as defect size, location, surgeon's technique, may influence the outcome of blow-out fracture repair.
