Mund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie : MKG · 2006
[Secondary midfacial reconstruction using different surgical techniques and computer assisted surgery].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание 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.
Lauer Günter, Pradel Winnie, Schneider Matthias, Eckelt Uwe
Аннотация
AIM: Aim of this retrospective study was to assess the outcome after secondary midfacial reconstruction using different operation techniques and computer assisted surgery. Functional and aesthetic aspects as well as experiences are reported.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: 18 patients were assessed for enophthalmos, diplopia, and aesthetics during a follow-up period of up to 2.5 years.
RESULTS: In 40% of the patients several techniques for soft and hard tissue reconstruction were used. In 5 of the 9 patients diplopia was improved; in 4 patients there was no change. A significant enophthalmos was corrected in 8 out of 12 patients. After additional surgery 6 patients had a good aesthetic result, 7 a satisfactory and 5 a poor.
CONCLUSION: For secondary midfacial reconstruction often a combination of different surgical techniques is necessary. Bony asymmetries and enophthalmos were successfully corrected, however, functional and aesthetic impairment due to bad soft tissue condition are difficult to correct. Computer assisted surgery is helpful for dissection within the orbit, for graft placement, and for positioning of osteotomized segments.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: 18 patients were assessed for enophthalmos, diplopia, and aesthetics during a follow-up period of up to 2.5 years.
RESULTS: In 40% of the patients several techniques for soft and hard tissue reconstruction were used. In 5 of the 9 patients diplopia was improved; in 4 patients there was no change. A significant enophthalmos was corrected in 8 out of 12 patients. After additional surgery 6 patients had a good aesthetic result, 7 a satisfactory and 5 a poor.
CONCLUSION: For secondary midfacial reconstruction often a combination of different surgical techniques is necessary. Bony asymmetries and enophthalmos were successfully corrected, however, functional and aesthetic impairment due to bad soft tissue condition are difficult to correct. Computer assisted surgery is helpful for dissection within the orbit, for graft placement, and for positioning of osteotomized segments.