Mehmet Serhat Mangan1, Ayse Enise Goker2, Serap Yurttaser Ocak3, Yavuz Uyar2. 1. Division of Oculoplastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Haydarpasa Numune Education and Research Hospital, Sadik Eratik Eye Clinic, University of Health Sciences. 2. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Okmeydani Education and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Okmeydani Education and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of nasoseptal cartilage grafts versus titanium mesh implants in pure orbital blowout fractures. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on 48 patients who had surgical repair of an orbital fracture. Patients who underwent pure orbital blowout fracture repair with either nasoseptal cartilage grafts or titanium mesh implants and at least 1 year postoperative follow-up were included in the study. The clinical features and treatment outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients fulfilled our study criteria and were included in the analyses. Nasoseptal graft was used in 12 patients (48%) while titanium mesh was preferred in 13 patients (52%). Preoperative clinical features including age, size of the floor defect, and preoperative clinical findings (enophthalmos, diplopia, and restriction of ocular motility) were similar between 2 groups. Mean postoperative follow-up was 14.7 ± 2.3 months in the nasoseptal group while it was 16.1 ± 2.5 months in the titanium group (P = 0.84). Diplopia and ocular motility limitation were resolved in all patients at the last postoperative follow-up visit, while 1 patient in each group had enophthalmos (8.3% versus 7.6%, P = 1.0). No patient in the nasoseptal group experienced postoperative complications while 2 patients in the titanium group (15.3%) developed material-related complications (P = 0.48). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term clinical results of nasoseptal cartilage grafts and titanium mesh implants in pure orbital blowout fractures with preoperative floor defects smaller than 4 cm2 were comparable. Nasoseptal cartilage grafts may be preferred in patients with septal deviation and no spurs or turbinate hypertrophy.
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of nasoseptal cartilage grafts versus titanium mesh implants in pure orbital blowout fractures. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on 48 patients who had surgical repair of an orbital fracture. Patients who underwent pure orbital blowout fracture repair with either nasoseptal cartilage grafts or titanium mesh implants and at least 1 year postoperative follow-up were included in the study. The clinical features and treatment outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients fulfilled our study criteria and were included in the analyses. Nasoseptal graft was used in 12 patients (48%) while titanium mesh was preferred in 13 patients (52%). Preoperative clinical features including age, size of the floor defect, and preoperative clinical findings (enophthalmos, diplopia, and restriction of ocular motility) were similar between 2 groups. Mean postoperative follow-up was 14.7 ± 2.3 months in the nasoseptal group while it was 16.1 ± 2.5 months in the titanium group (P = 0.84). Diplopia and ocular motility limitation were resolved in all patients at the last postoperative follow-up visit, while 1 patient in each group had enophthalmos (8.3% versus 7.6%, P = 1.0). No patient in the nasoseptal group experienced postoperative complications while 2 patients in the titanium group (15.3%) developed material-related complications (P = 0.48). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term clinical results of nasoseptal cartilage grafts and titanium mesh implants in pure orbital blowout fractures with preoperative floor defects smaller than 4 cm2 were comparable. Nasoseptal cartilage grafts may be preferred in patients with septal deviation and no spurs or turbinate hypertrophy.