Ophthalmic plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2003
Bovine pericardium versus homologous sclera as a wrapping for hydroxyapatite orbital implants.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Arat Yonca Ozkan, Shetlar Debra J, Boniuk Milton
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To report our experience with bovine pericardium as a wrapping material for hydroxyapatite orbital implants after enucleation and to compare the exposure rates of the implants wrapped with bovine pericardium versus donor sclera.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of all patients who received bovine pericardium-wrapped or donor sclera-wrapped hydroxyapatite implant after primary enucleation between March 1995 and December 2001.
RESULTS: Of the 26 patients who received donor sclera-wrapped implants after enucleation, 1 (3.8%) had implant exposure. Of the 26 patients who received bovine pericardium-wrapped implants after enucleation, 6 (23%) had implant exposure. The incidence of implant exposure with the use bovine pericardium wrapping material was found to be significantly higher than with sclera (P = 0.05). Six of the 7 implant exposures were noted in the first 6 months after placement of the orbital implant. Five of the 6 exposed bovine pericardium-wrapped hydroxyapatite implants were associated with socket infection. The case of exposure of the sclera-wrapped implant was treated conservatively by observation. Six patients who had exposure of bovine pericardium-wrapped implants required multiple repairs because of recurrent exposures. Four of these patients eventually required removal of the implant.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the advantages of using bovine pericardium as a wrapping material for hydroxyapatite orbital implants, we observed a significantly higher incidence of exposure with bovine pericardium compared with donor sclera in the early postoperative period. Use of bovine pericardium as a wrapping material for orbital implants should be avoided unless some future modifications of the technique can be developed to prevent such complications.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of all patients who received bovine pericardium-wrapped or donor sclera-wrapped hydroxyapatite implant after primary enucleation between March 1995 and December 2001.
RESULTS: Of the 26 patients who received donor sclera-wrapped implants after enucleation, 1 (3.8%) had implant exposure. Of the 26 patients who received bovine pericardium-wrapped implants after enucleation, 6 (23%) had implant exposure. The incidence of implant exposure with the use bovine pericardium wrapping material was found to be significantly higher than with sclera (P = 0.05). Six of the 7 implant exposures were noted in the first 6 months after placement of the orbital implant. Five of the 6 exposed bovine pericardium-wrapped hydroxyapatite implants were associated with socket infection. The case of exposure of the sclera-wrapped implant was treated conservatively by observation. Six patients who had exposure of bovine pericardium-wrapped implants required multiple repairs because of recurrent exposures. Four of these patients eventually required removal of the implant.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the advantages of using bovine pericardium as a wrapping material for hydroxyapatite orbital implants, we observed a significantly higher incidence of exposure with bovine pericardium compared with donor sclera in the early postoperative period. Use of bovine pericardium as a wrapping material for orbital implants should be avoided unless some future modifications of the technique can be developed to prevent such complications.