Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery · 2017
Surgical rehabilitation for anophthalmic sockets devoid of orbital implant.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Eo Doo-Ri, Kim Yoon-Duck, Woo Kyung In
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To determine the necessity of rehabilitative surgical procedures for no implant anophthalmic sockets, and predictive factors of corrective operations after secondary orbital implantation.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Nineteen unilateral anophthalmic patients without orbital implant were included. The distance of eyebrow, upper eyelid margin, and lower eyelid margin from the horizontal medial canthal line (BM, UM, and LM, respectively) was measured using photographs. The anophthalmic orbit anatomy was compared with that of the healthy side using CT scans.
RESULTS: Five (26.3%) patients showed satisfactory results with the secondary implantation alone. Fourteen (74%) patients needed additional surgeries for ptosis, shallow inferior fornix, enophthalmos, or lower eyelid malposition. Separated superior muscle complex and prominent intermuscular septum connecting the levator and the lateral rectus muscles were noticeable in CT scans. Predictive factors for ptosis surgery included longer BM (p = 0.04), shorter distance from the superior orbital wall to the upper margin of the prosthesis (p < 0.01), and a longer height of the prosthesis (p = 0.04).
CONCLUSION: Most patients needed multiple operations after secondary implantation for rehabilitation. Additional ptosis operation may be required for patients with a high brow on the anophthalmic side, a vertically long prosthesis, and an impinged prosthesis against the superior orbital wall.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Nineteen unilateral anophthalmic patients without orbital implant were included. The distance of eyebrow, upper eyelid margin, and lower eyelid margin from the horizontal medial canthal line (BM, UM, and LM, respectively) was measured using photographs. The anophthalmic orbit anatomy was compared with that of the healthy side using CT scans.
RESULTS: Five (26.3%) patients showed satisfactory results with the secondary implantation alone. Fourteen (74%) patients needed additional surgeries for ptosis, shallow inferior fornix, enophthalmos, or lower eyelid malposition. Separated superior muscle complex and prominent intermuscular septum connecting the levator and the lateral rectus muscles were noticeable in CT scans. Predictive factors for ptosis surgery included longer BM (p = 0.04), shorter distance from the superior orbital wall to the upper margin of the prosthesis (p < 0.01), and a longer height of the prosthesis (p = 0.04).
CONCLUSION: Most patients needed multiple operations after secondary implantation for rehabilitation. Additional ptosis operation may be required for patients with a high brow on the anophthalmic side, a vertically long prosthesis, and an impinged prosthesis against the superior orbital wall.