Literature DB >> 26337055

Lower eyelid complications associated with transconjunctival versus subciliary approaches to orbital floor fractures.

Niels Christian Pausch1,2, Nattapong Sirintawat3, Rouven Wagner3, Dirk Halama3, Kittipong Dhanuthai4,5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the frequencies of lower eyelid complications after subciliary versus transconjunctival approaches to orbital floor fractures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The investigators implemented a retrospective cohort study and enrolled a sample composed of subjects who had orbital floor repair. The predictor variable was surgical approach, classified as subciliary or transconjunctival. The primary outcome variable was postoperative lower eyelid complications (ectropion, entropion, and eyelid retraction). Other variables were demographic, anatomic, or time to surgery. Descriptive and bivariate statistics were computed. Statistical significance was set at P ≤ 0.05.
RESULTS: The study samples were composed of 346 patients (98 [28.3%] females; 225 [65%] underwent a subciliary approach) with a mean age of 42.7 ± 21.1 years. The subciliary approach was significantly linked to the higher rates of ectropion and the lower rates of entropion at 7 days and 6 months postoperatively. There was no statistically significant difference in the frequency of eyelid retraction between both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of orbital floor fractures, these results suggest that the use of the subciliary approach increases the frequency of ectropion, while the transconjunctival approach increases the frequency of entropion. The authors decline to comment on what the better surgical approach to the orbital floor fractures is. The selection should be based on an individual patient basis and surgeon's preference.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Eyelid complications; Orbital fracture; Subciliary approach; Transconjunctival approach

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26337055     DOI: 10.1007/s10006-015-0526-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 1865-1550


  11 in total

1.  Surgical approaches to the infraorbital rim and orbital floor: the case for the subtarsal approach.

Authors:  Spencer Wilson; Edward Ellis
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 1.895

2.  Evolving trends in the management of orbital floor fractures.

Authors:  Salah Aldekhayel; Hattan Aljaaly; Omar Fouda-Neel; Abdul-Wahab Shararah; Waleed Suliman Zaid; Mirko Gilardino
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 1.046

3.  The conjunctival approach to the orbital floor and maxilla in congenital malformation and trauma.

Authors:  P Tessier
Journal:  J Maxillofac Surg       Date:  1973-03

4.  Transconjunctival versus subciliary approach for orbital fracture repair--an anthropometric evaluation of 221 cases.

Authors:  Gregor F Raschke; Ulrich M Rieger; Rolf-Dieter Bader; Oliver Schaefer; Arndt Guentsch; Stefan Schultze-Mosgau
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2012-07-01       Impact factor: 3.573

5.  The incidence of lower eyelid malposition after facial fracture repair: a retrospective study and meta-analysis comparing subtarsal, subciliary, and transconjunctival incisions.

Authors:  Emily B Ridgway; Chen Chen; Salih Colakoglu; Shiva Gautam; Bernard T Lee
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 6.  Acquired entropion associated with the transconjunctival incision for facial fracture management.

Authors:  Emily B Ridgway; Chen Chen; Bernard T Lee
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 1.046

7.  Incidence of lower eyelid complications after a transconjunctival approach: influence of repeated incisions.

Authors:  Masanobu Yamashita; Miyuki Kishibe; Kenichi Shimada
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.046

8.  Subciliary versus swinging eyelid approach to the orbital floor.

Authors:  Giacomo De Riu; Silvio Mario Meloni; Roberta Gobbi; Damiano Soma; Alessandro Baj; Antonio Tullio
Journal:  J Craniomaxillofac Surg       Date:  2008-10-05       Impact factor: 2.078

9.  Subciliary versus subtarsal approaches to orbitozygomatic fractures.

Authors:  Rod J Rohrich; Jeffrey E Janis; William P Adams
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2003-04-15       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 10.  Retrospective analysis of orbital floor fractures--complications, outcome, and review of literature.

Authors:  Martin Gosau; Moritz Schöneich; Florian G Draenert; Tobias Ettl; Oliver Driemel; Torsten E Reichert
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2010-02-18       Impact factor: 3.573

View more
  3 in total

1.  The better surgical timing and approach for orbital fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jian Zhang; Xin He; Yanxiu Qi; Pingping Zhou
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2022-05

Review 2.  Risk of Lower Eyelids Malposition in Subciliary Compared to Transconjunctival Approach in Maxillofacial Fractures Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  I Gusti Putu Hendra Sanjaya; Agus Roy Rusly Hariantana Hamid; I Made Suka Adnyana; I Gusti Ayu Putri Purwanthi; Paulina Magdalena; Putu Eka Mardhika
Journal:  Open Access Maced J Med Sci       Date:  2019-08-30

3.  Orbital floor fractures: epidemiology and outcomes of 1594 reconstructions.

Authors:  Lukas Benedikt Seifert; Tim Mainka; Carlos Herrera-Vizcaino; Rene Verboket; Robert Sader
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2021-06-14       Impact factor: 3.693

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.