Edward Ellis1, Yinghui Tan. 1. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, USA. Edward.Ellis@UTSouthwestern.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the adequacy of internal orbital reconstruction in pure blowout fractures using either cranial bone grafts or titanium mesh implants. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The preoperative and postoperative true coronal computed tomography (CT) scans of 58 patients with unilateral pure orbital blowout fractures were included in the study. Demographic data and measurements of the pretreatment size of the defects were tabulated. The accuracy of reconstruction was assessed subjectively by 1 surgeon by scoring the position of the implant/graft, repositioning of orbital soft tissues, and assessment of orbital volume using the uninjured side for comparison. The cross-sectional area of the anterior, middle, and posterior regions of the reconstructed defect was statistically compared with the same locations on the uninjured orbits by scanning the CT scans and calculating the number of pixels within the selected CT slices. A comparison of the accuracy of reconstructions for those reconstructed with cranial bone graft and those with titanium mesh was statistically performed using parametric (for subjective analyses) and nonparametric tests (for cross-sectional area data). RESULTS: Thirty-eight cases were classified as fractures of the orbital floor, 4 as isolated medial wall fractures, and 16 as combined floor/medial wall fractures. There was a statistically significant difference in the surgeon's subjective ratings of adequacy of reconstructions between titanium mesh and bone-grafted groups. Orbits reconstructed with titanium mesh were more accurate than those reconstructed with bone (P <.001). Overall, there was no significant difference in cross-sectional areas between the reconstructed and uninjured orbits in the middle and posterior regions of the defects, but the anterior region showed significantly smaller cross-sectional areas in the reconstructed orbits (P <.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although there was great individual variability and both materials could be successfully used, the orbits reconstructed with titanium mesh showed better overall reconstructions than those reconstructed with bone grafts. Copyright 2003 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons J Oral Maxillofac Surg 61:442-453, 2003
PURPOSE: To assess the adequacy of internal orbital reconstruction in pure blowout fractures using either cranial bone grafts or titanium mesh implants. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The preoperative and postoperative true coronal computed tomography (CT) scans of 58 patients with unilateral pure orbital blowout fractures were included in the study. Demographic data and measurements of the pretreatment size of the defects were tabulated. The accuracy of reconstruction was assessed subjectively by 1 surgeon by scoring the position of the implant/graft, repositioning of orbital soft tissues, and assessment of orbital volume using the uninjured side for comparison. The cross-sectional area of the anterior, middle, and posterior regions of the reconstructed defect was statistically compared with the same locations on the uninjured orbits by scanning the CT scans and calculating the number of pixels within the selected CT slices. A comparison of the accuracy of reconstructions for those reconstructed with cranial bone graft and those with titanium mesh was statistically performed using parametric (for subjective analyses) and nonparametric tests (for cross-sectional area data). RESULTS: Thirty-eight cases were classified as fractures of the orbital floor, 4 as isolated medial wall fractures, and 16 as combined floor/medial wall fractures. There was a statistically significant difference in the surgeon's subjective ratings of adequacy of reconstructions between titanium mesh and bone-grafted groups. Orbits reconstructed with titanium mesh were more accurate than those reconstructed with bone (P <.001). Overall, there was no significant difference in cross-sectional areas between the reconstructed and uninjured orbits in the middle and posterior regions of the defects, but the anterior region showed significantly smaller cross-sectional areas in the reconstructed orbits (P <.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although there was great individual variability and both materials could be successfully used, the orbits reconstructed with titanium mesh showed better overall reconstructions than those reconstructed with bone grafts. Copyright 2003 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons J Oral Maxillofac Surg 61:442-453, 2003
Authors: Javier Rodriguez; Ramon Galan; Gabriel Forteza; Mario Mateos; Jens Mommsen; Olga Vazquez Bouso; Veronica Piera Journal: Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr Date: 2009-03
Authors: Anthony Echo; Erik M Wolfswinkel; William Weathers; Aisha McKnight; Shayan Izaddoost Journal: Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr Date: 2013-09-26
Authors: T V Kühnel; E Vairaktaris; K A Schlegel; F W Neukam; B Kühnel; L M Holbach; E Nkenke Journal: Ophthalmologe Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 1.059