TY - JOUR
T1 - A prospective multicenter study to compare the precision of posttraumatic internal orbital reconstruction with standard preformed and individualized orbital implants
AU - Zimmerer, Rüdiger M.
AU - Ellis, Edward
AU - Aniceto, Gregorio Sanchez
AU - Schramm, Alexander
AU - Wagner, Maximilian E.H.
AU - Grant, Michael P.
AU - Cornelius, Carl Peter
AU - Strong, Edward Bradley
AU - Rana, Majeed
AU - Chye, Lim Thiam
AU - Calle, Alvaro Rivero
AU - Wilde, Frank
AU - Perez, Daniel
AU - Tavassol, Frank
AU - Bittermann, Gido
AU - Mahoney, Nicholas R.
AU - Alamillos, Marta Redondo
AU - Bašić, Joanna
AU - Dittmann, Jan
AU - Rasse, Michael
AU - Gellrich, Nils Claudius
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was funded by AOCMF (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Osteosynthese Cranio-Maxillo-Facial) . No author has a conflict of interest to declare.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - Purpose A variety of implants are available for orbital reconstruction. Titanium orbital mesh plates are available either as standard preformed implants or able to be individualized for the patient. The aim of this study was to analyze whether individualized orbital implants allow a more precise reconstruction of the orbit than standard preformed implants. Materials and methods A total of 195 patients treated between 2010 and 2014 were followed up to 12 weeks after surgery. Of the patients, 100 had received standardized preformed and 95 individualized implants. The precision of orbital reconstruction with the different implants was determined by comparing the variances in the volume difference between the reconstructed and the contralateral orbit on the postoperative computed tomographic scans. Clinical volume-related parameters including globe position, vision, motility, and diplopia and surgical details including approach, timing and technique of implant modification, use of navigation, duration of surgery, as well as adverse events were documented. Results Orbital reconstruction was significantly more precise when individualized implants were used. The same was seen with intraoperative navigation. An overlap in the use of individualized implants and navigation makes it difficult to attribute the improved precision to a single factor. Conclusion This study demonstrated that individualization and navigation provide clinical benefit.
AB - Purpose A variety of implants are available for orbital reconstruction. Titanium orbital mesh plates are available either as standard preformed implants or able to be individualized for the patient. The aim of this study was to analyze whether individualized orbital implants allow a more precise reconstruction of the orbit than standard preformed implants. Materials and methods A total of 195 patients treated between 2010 and 2014 were followed up to 12 weeks after surgery. Of the patients, 100 had received standardized preformed and 95 individualized implants. The precision of orbital reconstruction with the different implants was determined by comparing the variances in the volume difference between the reconstructed and the contralateral orbit on the postoperative computed tomographic scans. Clinical volume-related parameters including globe position, vision, motility, and diplopia and surgical details including approach, timing and technique of implant modification, use of navigation, duration of surgery, as well as adverse events were documented. Results Orbital reconstruction was significantly more precise when individualized implants were used. The same was seen with intraoperative navigation. An overlap in the use of individualized implants and navigation makes it difficult to attribute the improved precision to a single factor. Conclusion This study demonstrated that individualization and navigation provide clinical benefit.
KW - Blow-out fracture
KW - CAD/CAM
KW - Comparative study
KW - Intraoperative navigation
KW - Orbital fracture
KW - Orbital implant
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84994222297&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84994222297&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jcms.2016.07.014
DO - 10.1016/j.jcms.2016.07.014
M3 - Article
C2 - 27519662
AN - SCOPUS:84994222297
SN - 1010-5182
VL - 44
SP - 1485
EP - 1497
JO - Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
JF - Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
IS - 9
ER -