Prosthetic motility in pegged versus unpegged integrated porous orbital implants

被引:39
|
作者
Guillinta, P [1 ]
Vasani, SN [1 ]
Granet, DB [1 ]
Kikkawa, DO [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Diego, Sch Med, Shiley Eye Ctr,Dept Ophthalmol, Div Ophthalm Pathol & Reconstruct Surg, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
来源
关键词
D O I
10.1097/01.IOP.0000056022.07896.06
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Purpose. To objectively measure and compare prosthetic motility in pegged versus unpegged orbital implants and to determine subjective patient assessment of motility after the pegging procedure. Methods: A prospective case series of 10 patients with integrated porous orbital implants, who had secondary motility peg placement procedure, were studied. Infrared oculography was used to quantitatively assess pegged and unpegged prosthetic eye motility in horizontal and vertical excursions. Results: For horizontal excursions, prosthetic motility in unpegged implants retained an average of 49.6% of measured motility of the contralateral normal eye, which increased to 86.5% with peg placement (P<0.05). For vertical excursions, prosthetic motility in unpegged implants retained an average of 51.3% of measured motility of the contralateral normal eye, which increased to 54.3% with peg placement (P<0.3). Nine of 10 patients judged their motility as "significantly improved," and I patient gave a rating of "some improvement" after peg placement. Four of 10 patients had granulomas around the peg sites. Conclusions. Objective assessment of prosthetic motility shows a significant increase in horizontal gaze after motility peg placement.
引用
收藏
页码:119 / 122
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Experience with orbital implants in particular with porous hydroxyapatite materials
    Norda, AG
    Meyer-Rüsenberg, HW
    OPHTHALMOLOGE, 2003, 100 (06): : 437 - 444
  • [32] Scanning electron microscopic examination of porous orbital implants
    Mawn, LA
    Jordan, DR
    Gilberg, S
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY-JOURNAL CANADIEN D OPHTALMOLOGIE, 1998, 33 (04): : 203 - 209
  • [33] Comparison of Complications From Porous Anophthalmic Orbital Implants
    Gupta, D.
    Ramey, N.
    Richard, M. J.
    Woodward, J. A.
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2010, 51 (13)
  • [34] The Scleral Cap Technique for Porous and Nonporous Orbital Implants
    Jordan, David R.
    OPHTHALMIC PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2023, 39 (01): : 92 - 97
  • [35] Comparison of Complication Rates of Porous Anophthalmic Orbital Implants
    Ramey, Nicholas
    Gupta, Divakar
    Price, Kristina
    Husain, Amina
    Richard, Michael
    Woodward, Julie
    OPHTHALMIC SURGERY LASERS & IMAGING, 2011, 42 (05) : 434 - 440
  • [36] Fibrovascularization of porous polyethylene orbital floor implants in humans
    Patel, PJ
    Rees, HC
    Olver, JM
    ARCHIVES OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2003, 121 (03) : 400 - 403
  • [37] Re: "Methods of Antibiotic Instillation in Porous Orbital Implants"
    Tawfik, Hatem A.
    OPHTHALMIC PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2009, 25 (03): : 256 - 256
  • [38] Reply re: "Implant infection in porous orbital implants"
    Karslioglu, Safak
    Serin, Didem
    OPHTHALMIC PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2007, 23 (06): : 503 - 504
  • [39] Repair of fractures of the orbital floor with porous polyethylene implants
    Yilmaz, Mustafa
    Vayvada, Haluk
    Aydin, Enver
    Menderes, Adnan
    Atabey, Atay
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2007, 45 (08): : 640 - 644
  • [40] ANIMAL-MODEL OF POROUS POLYETHYLENE ORBITAL IMPLANTS
    GOLDBERG, RA
    DRESNER, SC
    BRASLOW, RA
    KOSSOVSKY, N
    LEGMANN, A
    OPHTHALMIC PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 1994, 10 (02): : 104 - 109