We have located links that may give you full text access.
A Comparison of Endoscopic Reduction for Medial Blowout Fractures Using a Bioresorbable Panel and Silastic Sheet.
Journal of Craniofacial Surgery 2019 January 18
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.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app