A Comparison of Endoscopic Reduction for Medial Blowout Fractures Using a Bioresorbable Panel and Silastic Sheet.

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.