Literature DB >> 16845724

High density porous polyethylene material (Medpor) as an unwrapped orbital implant.

Yan-hong Chen1, Hong-guang Cui.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To introduce the clinical effect among patients who received an unwrapped orbital implant with high density porous polyethylene material (Medpor) after enucleation or evisceration.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a series of 302 patients with anophthalmia who underwent placement of an unwrapped high density porous polyethylene orbital implant. We compared the patients (n=180) who accepted primary implant placement with those (n=122) who accepted secondary implant placement. Parameters evaluated included: age at time of surgery, date of surgery, sex, implant type and size, surgery type, the surgical procedure and technique performed, and complications.
RESULTS: The time of follow-up ranged from 2.0 to 58.0 months (mean 32.5 months). A total of 5 of 302 (1.66%) cases had documented postoperative complications. The following problems were noted after surgery: implant exposure, 3 patients (0.99%); implant removed due to orbital infection, 1 patient (0.34%); ptosis, 1 patient (0.34%). There were no significant complications observed in other 297 cases and all implants showed good orbital motility. The clinical effect of primary implant placement is better than that of secondary placement.
CONCLUSION: High density porous polyethylene material can be used successfully as an unwrapped orbital implant in anopthalmic socket surgery with minimal complications. The material is well tolerated, nonantigenic and has low rate of infection and migration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16845724      PMCID: PMC1533749          DOI: 10.1631/jzus.2006.B0679

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B        ISSN: 1673-1581            Impact factor:   3.066


  14 in total

1.  Bovine pericardium as a wrapping for orbital implants.

Authors:  G S Gayre; C Debacker; W Lipham; H A Tawfik; D Holck; J J Dutton
Journal:  Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 1.746

2.  Enucleation with unwrapped porous and nonporous orbital implants: a 15-year experience.

Authors:  Nikolaos Trichopoulos; James J Augsburger
Journal:  Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 1.746

3.  Complications of porous spherical orbital implants.

Authors:  H D Remulla; P A Rubin; J W Shore; F C Sutula; D J Townsend; J J Woog; K V Jahrling
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 12.079

4.  [Porous polyethylene (Medpor) orbital implant. Prospective study of 75 primary implantations].

Authors:  E Van Acker; P De Potter
Journal:  J Fr Ophtalmol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 0.818

5.  Wrapping hydroxyapatite orbital implants with posterior auricular muscle complex grafts.

Authors:  T C Naugle; A M Lee; B G Haik; M A Callahan
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 5.258

Review 6.  Complications of hydroxyapatite orbital implants. A review of 100 consecutive cases and a comparison of Dexon mesh (polyglycolic acid) with scleral wrapping.

Authors:  J H Oestreicher; E Liu; M Berkowitz
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 12.079

7.  Exposure of primary orbital implants in postenucleation retinoblastoma patients.

Authors:  V Lee; I Subak-Sharpe; J L Hungerford; N P Davies; S Logani
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  Postcontrast magnetic resonance imaging assessment of porous polyethylene orbital implant (Medpor).

Authors:  P De Potter; T Duprez; G Cosnard
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 12.079

9.  Hydroxyapatite orbital implants. Experience with 100 cases.

Authors:  A McNab
Journal:  Aust N Z J Ophthalmol       Date:  1995-05

10.  Tissue breakdown and exposure associated with orbital hydroxyapatite implants.

Authors:  H Buettner; G B Bartley
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  1992-06-15       Impact factor: 5.258

View more
  4 in total

1.  [Porous orbital implants].

Authors:  B Cleres; H W Meyer-Rüsenberg
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 1.059

Review 2.  Integrated versus non-integrated orbital implants for treating anophthalmic sockets.

Authors:  Silvana Schellini; Regina El Dib; Leandro Re Silva; Joyce G Farat; Yuqing Zhang; Eliane C Jorge
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-11-07

3.  Effects and complications of placement of motility coupling post in porous polyethylene orbital implants.

Authors:  Hong-guang Cui; Rong-rong Hu; Hui-yan Li; Wei Han
Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.066

4.  High-Density Polyethylene Material versus Autogenous Grafts in Craniofacial Augmentation Procedures.

Authors:  Kshitij Agarwal; Rajesh B Dhirawani; Sauvik Singha; Anshalika Agrawal
Journal:  Ann Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2019 Jan-Jun
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.