The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2019
A Comparison of Endoscopic Reduction for Medial Blowout Fractures Using a Bioresorbable Panel and Silastic Sheet.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Kim Joo Yeon, Jung Tae Young, Kwon Jae Hwan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare the effectiveness of endoscopic endonasal reduction using a bioresorbable panel and silastic sheet packed with Merocel for blowout fractures of the medial orbital wall.
DESIGN: Retrospective study.
METHODS: The study group consisted of 147 patients who underwent endoscopic endonasal reduction of a blowout fracture of the medial orbital wall between January 2005 and December 2016. Fifty-seven fractures were repaired using a splint formed by a silastic sheet and Merocel (splint group), whereas 90 fractures were repaired using a bioresorbable panel for interposition (interposition group). Postoperative complications and surgical outcomes of the 2 groups were compared.
RESULTS: Preoperative diplopia in both groups (n = 30) was resolved except 1 in interposition group after the reduction. Enophthalmos was resolved in 10 cases in the splint group and in 6 cases in the interposition group. In postoperative CT scans, 20 of the 57 cases in the splint group exhibited under- or overcorrection, compared with 9 of the 90 cases in the interposition group (P < 0.05). There were no sinus infections or implant-related side effects in the interposition group except for implant extrusion in 4 cases, whereas 7 cases developed sinusitis in the splint group (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Endonasal endoscopic reduction using a bioresorbable panel may be considered as a surgical alternative for the treatment of medial orbital blowout fractures.
DESIGN: Retrospective study.
METHODS: The study group consisted of 147 patients who underwent endoscopic endonasal reduction of a blowout fracture of the medial orbital wall between January 2005 and December 2016. Fifty-seven fractures were repaired using a splint formed by a silastic sheet and Merocel (splint group), whereas 90 fractures were repaired using a bioresorbable panel for interposition (interposition group). Postoperative complications and surgical outcomes of the 2 groups were compared.
RESULTS: Preoperative diplopia in both groups (n = 30) was resolved except 1 in interposition group after the reduction. Enophthalmos was resolved in 10 cases in the splint group and in 6 cases in the interposition group. In postoperative CT scans, 20 of the 57 cases in the splint group exhibited under- or overcorrection, compared with 9 of the 90 cases in the interposition group (P < 0.05). There were no sinus infections or implant-related side effects in the interposition group except for implant extrusion in 4 cases, whereas 7 cases developed sinusitis in the splint group (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Endonasal endoscopic reduction using a bioresorbable panel may be considered as a surgical alternative for the treatment of medial orbital blowout fractures.