PURPOSE: To evaluate clinical characteristics, preoperative imaging findings, pre- and post-operative outcomes, and satisfaction of patients requiring secondary reconstruction after inadequate primary orbital fracture repair. METHODS: Retrospective review of 13 patients requiring secondary orbital reconstruction following unsatisfactory primary repair. Primary outcomes were postoperative changes in enophthalmos, hypo- or hyper-globus, superior sulcus deformity, and restrictive strabismus. Secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Of 13 patients, 9 patients had primary orbital implants, and 4 patients did not. Of the 9 with implants, 6 had inferior displacement posteriorly, 2 had superior displacement posteriorly, and 1 had good position but had entrapped orbital tissues beneath it. Findings from primary surgery included enophthalmos (12/13), hypoglobus (10/13), hyperglobus (1/13), superior sulcus deformity (9/13), restricted supraduction (12/13), and restricted infraduction (7/13). Mean preoperative enophthalmos and hypoglobus were 4.4 ± 2.6 mm and 2.9 ± 1.4 mm, respectively. Secondary reconstruction resulted in mean reduction of enophthalmos by 3.4 ± 1.4 mm (p < 0.001), of hypoglobus by 2.9 ± 1.5 mm (p < 0.001), and of hyperglobus by 1 mm (n = 1). All 9 patients had resolution of their superior sulcus deformity. Of 12 cases with restricted ocular motility, all had improvements in postoperative motility following secondary surgery. Mean improvement in supraduction and infraduction was 1.8 ± 1.0 points (p < 0.001) and 1.4 ± 1.3 points (p = 0.025), respectively. Twelve patients reported being very satisfied or satisfied with secondary surgery; 1 patient was neutral. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that secondary orbital reconstruction can achieve excellent functional and cosmetic results with high patient satisfaction and minimal complications. Secondary reconstruction of previously repaired orbital fractures should be considered when clinically indicated.
PURPOSE: To evaluate clinical characteristics, preoperative imaging findings, pre- and post-operative outcomes, and satisfaction of patients requiring secondary reconstruction after inadequate primary orbital fracture repair. METHODS: Retrospective review of 13 patients requiring secondary orbital reconstruction following unsatisfactory primary repair. Primary outcomes were postoperative changes in enophthalmos, hypo- or hyper-globus, superior sulcus deformity, and restrictive strabismus. Secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Of 13 patients, 9 patients had primary orbital implants, and 4 patients did not. Of the 9 with implants, 6 had inferior displacement posteriorly, 2 had superior displacement posteriorly, and 1 had good position but had entrapped orbital tissues beneath it. Findings from primary surgery included enophthalmos (12/13), hypoglobus (10/13), hyperglobus (1/13), superior sulcus deformity (9/13), restricted supraduction (12/13), and restricted infraduction (7/13). Mean preoperative enophthalmos and hypoglobus were 4.4 ± 2.6 mm and 2.9 ± 1.4 mm, respectively. Secondary reconstruction resulted in mean reduction of enophthalmos by 3.4 ± 1.4 mm (p < 0.001), of hypoglobus by 2.9 ± 1.5 mm (p < 0.001), and of hyperglobus by 1 mm (n = 1). All 9 patients had resolution of their superior sulcus deformity. Of 12 cases with restricted ocular motility, all had improvements in postoperative motility following secondary surgery. Mean improvement in supraduction and infraduction was 1.8 ± 1.0 points (p < 0.001) and 1.4 ± 1.3 points (p = 0.025), respectively. Twelve patients reported being very satisfied or satisfied with secondary surgery; 1 patient was neutral. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that secondary orbital reconstruction can achieve excellent functional and cosmetic results with high patient satisfaction and minimal complications. Secondary reconstruction of previously repaired orbital fractures should be considered when clinically indicated.
Authors: Nathan W Blessing; Andrew J Rong; Brian C Tse; Benjamin P Erickson; Bradford W Lee; Thomas E Johnson Journal: Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2021 May-Jun 01 Impact factor: 2.011