uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Treatment of Orbital Fractures: Evaluation of Surgical Techniques and Materials for Reconstruction
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Plastic Surgery.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Plastic Surgery.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Plastic Surgery.
2010 (English)In: The Journal of craniofacial surgery (Print), ISSN 1049-2275, E-ISSN 1536-3732, Vol. 21, no 4, 1033-1037 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Reconstruction of the fractured orbit serves to prevent functional and aesthetic posttraumatic sequels. In 2004, the surgical protocol at our unit was modified with respect to techniques for surgical access, types, and materials for reconstruction. The modifications were as follows: (a) introduction of medial orbital wall reconstructions through a bicoronal approach, (b) transconjunctival approach instead of the subciliary approach, and (c) porous polyethylene or porous polyethylene-titanium instead of autologous bone grafts. To evaluate the different surgical techniques and materials used, orbital reconstructions performed at our unit from 2000 to 2007 were retrospectively studied. In total, 177 primary or first-time secondary reconstructions were performed in 176 patients. The overall rate of early complications requiring medical or surgical intervention was 6.4%, and the reoperation rate was 3.4%. There were no statistically significant differences in the frequency of cicatricial eyelid complications between the subciliary and the transconjunctival approaches. There was a reduction in operative time with the use of implants compared with the use of bone. The overall rate of infections was 2%; however, there were no infections in the group treated with implants. Seven patients had secondary surgery for persistent enophthalmos, 4 of them due to defects in the medial orbital wall that had not been corrected at the time of primary reconstruction of the orbital floor. In conclusion, porous polyethylene/porous polyethylene-titanium is a safe material for orbital reconstructions. Reconstruction of the medial orbital wall is important to prevent posttraumatic enophthalmos, particularly in combined medial wall-orbital floor fractures.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. Vol. 21, no 4, 1033-1037 p.
Keyword [en]
Orbit, Medpor, craniofacial trauma
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-135952DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181e4345dISI: 000280149100021OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-135952DiVA: diva2:375888
Available from: 2010-12-09 Created: 2010-12-09 Last updated: 2017-12-11Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Nowinski, DanielMesso, Elias

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Nowinski, DanielMesso, Elias
By organisation
Plastic Surgery
In the same journal
The Journal of craniofacial surgery (Print)
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 371 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf