Archives of Plastic Surgery

Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한성형외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Safety of Silastic Sheet for Orbital Wall Reconstruction

  • Moon, Seong June (Department of Plastic Surgery, Ewha Womans University Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine) ;
  • Suh, Hyun Suk (Department of Plastic Surgery, Ewha Womans University Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Bo Young (Department of Plastic Surgery, Ewha Womans University Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine) ;
  • Kang, So Ra (Department of Plastic Surgery, Ewha Womans University Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine)
  • Received : 2014.02.05
  • Accepted : 2014.05.19
  • Published : 2014.07.15
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background Many implants are being used for the reconstruction of orbital wall fractures. The effect of the choice of implant for the reconstruction of an orbital wall fracture on the surgical outcome is under debate. The purpose of this article is to compare the outcomes of orbital wall reconstruction of small orbital wall fractures on the basis of the implants used. Methods The authors conducted a retrospective study using electronic databases. Between March 2001 and December 2012, 461 patients with orbital wall fractures were included in this study. Among them, 431 patients in whom the fracture size was less than $300mm^2$ were analyzed. The fracture size was calculated using computed tomography scans of the orbit in the sagittal and coronal images. Cases in which the fracture size was less than $300mm^2$ were included in this study. Results One hundred and twenty-nine patients were treated with silastic sheets; 238 patients were treated with titanium meshes; and absorbable meshes were used in the case of 64 patients. Overall, 13 patients required revision, and the revision rate was 3.0%. The revision rate of the silastic sheet group was 5.4%. In the multivariable analysis, the revision rate of the group reconstructed with silastic sheets was highly statistically significant (P=0.043, odds ratio=3.65). However, other factors such as age, sex, fracture type, and fracture size were not significant. Conclusions Reconstruction of orbital wall fractures with silastic sheets may cause more complications than that with other materials such as titanium meshes and absorbable meshes.

Keywords

References

  1. Cole P, Boyd V, Banerji S, et al. Comprehensive management of orbital fractures. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007;120:57S-63S. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000260752.20481.b4
  2. Brucoli M, Arcuri F, Cavenaghi R, et al. Analysis of complications after surgical repair of orbital fractures. J Craniofac Surg 2011;22:1387-90. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e31821cc317
  3. Park MS, Kim YJ, Kim H, et al. Prevalence of Diplopia and Extraocular Movement Limitation according to the Location of Isolated Pure Blowout Fractures. Arch Plast Surg 2012;39:204-8. https://doi.org/10.5999/aps.2012.39.3.204
  4. Bratton EM, Durairaj VD. Orbital implants for fracture repair. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2011;22:400-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICU.0b013e3283499409
  5. Ploder O, Klug C, Voracek M, et al. A computer-based method for calculation of orbital floor fractures from coronal computed tomography scans. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001;59:1437-42. https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2001.28278
  6. Jaquiery C, Aeppli C, Cornelius P, et al. Reconstruction of orbital wall defects: critical review of 72 patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;36:193-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2006.11.002
  7. Morrison AD, Sanderson RC, Moos KF. The use of silastic as an orbital implant for reconstruction of orbital wall defects: review of 311 cases treated over 20 years. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1995;53:412-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(95)90714-9
  8. Schmidt BL, Lee C, Young DM, et al. Intraorbital squamous epithelial cyst: an unusual complication of Silastic implantation. J Craniofac Surg 1998;9:452-5. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001665-199809000-00012
  9. Lee HB, Nunery WR. Orbital adherence syndrome secondary to titanium implant material. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2009;25:33-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/IOP.0b013e3181929b6e
  10. Yun HK, Yi S, Joh SP, et al. Complications after open reduction of blow-out fracture using silicone sheet. J Korean Cleft Palate-Craniofac Assoc 2001;2:72-6.
  11. Prowse SJ, Hold PM, Gilmour RF, et al. Orbital floor reconstruction: a case for silicone. A 12 year experience. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2010;63:1105-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2009.05.057

Cited by

  1. A Wrapping Method for Inserting Titanium Micro-Mesh Implants in the Reconstruction of Blowout Fractures vol.43, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.5999/aps.2016.43.1.84
  2. Surgical correction in orbitotemporal neurofibromatosis with dystopia vol.16, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-016-0181-9
  3. Delayed reconstruction of posttraumatic facial deformities vol.61, pp.12, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5124/jkma.2018.61.12.740
  4. A Rare Complication of a Large Emphysema after Orbital Wall Fracture Surgery with Silastic Sheet Implant vol.34, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3341/kjo.2020.0016
  5. Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Silicone Elastomer Sheet during Decompressive Craniectomy: Anti-Adhesive Role in Cranioplasty vol.11, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11010124
  6. Theoretical model of pediatric orbital trapdoor fractures and provisional personalized 3D printing-assisted surgical solution vol.6, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.08.029