Literature DB >> 19300157

Enucleation with hydroxyapatite implantation versus evisceration plus scleral quadrisection and alloplastic implantation.

Ali Sadeghi Tari1, Mehrdad Malihi, Abolfazl Kasaee, Syed Ziaeddin Tabatabaie, Khalil Hamzedust, Mir Farnood Musavi, Mohammad Taher Rajabi.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the motility and complications of enucleation with evisceration plus scleral quadrisection.
METHODS: In a prospective study between January 2006 and June 2007, 50 patients underwent evisceration with scleral quadrisection and alloplastic implantation (group 1) and 50 patients underwent enucleation and hydroxyapatite implantation (group 2). Horizontal and vertical excursions of implants and complications such as exposure or extrusion and deep superior sulcus deformity were evaluated postoperatively.
RESULTS: After a mean follow-up interval of 11.5 months for group 1 and 13.2 months for group 2, vertical measurements were approximately 20% less than horizontal measurements in both groups. The mean horizontal and vertical movements in group 2 were significantly less than in group 1 (p < 0.001). There was 1 case of small hydroxyapatite exposure in group 2 (1 in 50; 2%) and 2 cases of implant extrusion in group 1 (4%) (p = 0.50). Deep superior sulcus deformity was noted in 10 patients in group 1 (20%) and 7 patients in group 2 (14%) (p = 0.43). Analysis of covariance in both groups showed that age, gender, and follow-up interval were not predictors of movement in either direction (all p-values >0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Evisceration with scleral quadrisection and alloplatic sphere implantation can effectively substitute for a more extensive procedure such as enucleation in patients with painful blind eyes, cosmetically unacceptable blind eyes, and medically uncontrolled endophthalmitis. It provides rapidity, ease, and better implant excursion and lower cost of the implants compared with their porous counterparts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19300157     DOI: 10.1097/IOP.0b013e3181984dfe

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0740-9303            Impact factor:   1.746


  7 in total

1.  Comparative study of modified and conventional secondary hydroxyapatite orbital implantations.

Authors:  Yong Zhao; Mao-Nian Zhang; Yun-Xian Gao; Xiao-Wei Gao; Bing Ren
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-10-18       Impact factor: 1.779

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.  Outcomes of ocular evisceration and enucleation in the British Armed Forces from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Authors:  Christopher J Holmes; Anthony McLaughlin; Tahir Farooq; John Awad; Aidan Murray; Robert Scott
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2019-06-05       Impact factor: 3.775

4.  Autologous sclera-muscle flaps technique in evisceration with hydroxyapatite implantation.

Authors:  Ying Zhu; Hong Zhang; Yin-Wei Song; Jing-Min Guo; Xiao-Lan Xu; Jun-Ming Wang
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-08-18       Impact factor: 1.779

5.  Removal of the eye in a tertiary care center of China: a retrospective study on 573 cases in 20 years.

Authors:  Ying Zhang; Mao-Nian Zhang; Xin Wang; Xiao-Fei Chen
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-10-18       Impact factor: 1.779

6.  Evisceration in the modern age.

Authors:  Laura T Phan; Thomas N Hwang; Timothy J McCulley
Journal:  Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-01

7.  Low-cost three-dimensional printed orbital template-assisted patient-specific implants for the correction of spherical orbital implant migration.

Authors:  Tarjani Vivek Dave; Sweety Tiple; Sandeep Vempati; Mansha Palo; Mohammad Javed Ali; Swathi Kaliki; Milind N Naik
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 1.848

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.