International ophthalmology · 2024
Clinical outcomes and complications of a new high-density polyethylene-based spherical integrated porous orbital implant.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Garrido-Hermosilla Antonio M, Díaz-Ruiz María Concepción Concepción, Avilés-Prieto Javier, Domínguez-Llamas Sandra, Romero-Barranca Isabel, Aguiar-Caro José Antonio, Espejo-Arjona Francisco, Relimpio-López María Isabel
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To describe our experience over 6 years using a new high-density polyethylene-based spherical integrated porous orbital implants (Oculfit).
METHODS: This is an observational retrospective case series study analyzing all cases requiring Oculfit implants between February 2015 and September 2021. Clinical information regarding the population included, the characteristics of the implant, and the outcomes and complications during the follow-up were noted. The success of the implant was defined according to anatomical and functional parameters.
RESULTS: The study analyzed 90 cases of anophthalmic patients. The main causes for enucleation or evisceration were ocular decompensations (36.7%) and neoplasms (27.8% uveal melanoma and 7.8% retinoblastoma). Anatomical success was identified in 63 (70.0%) cases, functional success in 79 (87.8%) and complete success (anatomical + functional) in 61 (67.7%) cases. Factors associated with the functional success were age and exposure of the primary orbital implant. Complications appeared in 11 (12.2%) cases, which were completely resolved without sequelae in 4 (4.4%). Orbital explant was required in 5 (5.6%) cases.
CONCLUSION: In our experience, Oculfit can be considered a useful alternative among the currently available options for orbital implants and has a good efficacy/safety profile.
METHODS: This is an observational retrospective case series study analyzing all cases requiring Oculfit implants between February 2015 and September 2021. Clinical information regarding the population included, the characteristics of the implant, and the outcomes and complications during the follow-up were noted. The success of the implant was defined according to anatomical and functional parameters.
RESULTS: The study analyzed 90 cases of anophthalmic patients. The main causes for enucleation or evisceration were ocular decompensations (36.7%) and neoplasms (27.8% uveal melanoma and 7.8% retinoblastoma). Anatomical success was identified in 63 (70.0%) cases, functional success in 79 (87.8%) and complete success (anatomical + functional) in 61 (67.7%) cases. Factors associated with the functional success were age and exposure of the primary orbital implant. Complications appeared in 11 (12.2%) cases, which were completely resolved without sequelae in 4 (4.4%). Orbital explant was required in 5 (5.6%) cases.
CONCLUSION: In our experience, Oculfit can be considered a useful alternative among the currently available options for orbital implants and has a good efficacy/safety profile.