Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 3774
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 62  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 145-153

Comparative analysis of use of porous orbital implant with mucus membrane graft and dermis fat graft as a primary procedure in reconstruction of severely contracted socket


1 Department of Orbit, Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Sri Sankaradeva Nethralaya, Beltola, Guwahati, Assam, India
2 Department of Comprehensive Ophthalmology, Sri Sankaradeva Nethralaya, Beltola, Guwahati, Assam, India

Correspondence Address:
Kasturi Bhattacharjee
Department of Orbit, Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Sri Sankaradeva Nethralaya, 96 Basistha Road, Beltola, Guwahati - 781 028, Assam
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0301-4738.128593

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: The purpose of our study is to present a surgical technique of primary porous orbital ball implantation with overlying mucus membrane graft (MMG) for reconstruction of severely contracted socket and to evaluate prosthesis retention and motility in comparison to dermis fat graft (DFG). Study Design: Prospective comparative study. Materials and Methods: A total of 24 patients of severe socket contracture (Grade 2-4 Krishna's classification) were subdivided into two groups, 12 patients in each group. In Group I, DFG have been used for reconstruction. In Group II, porous polyethylene implant with MMG has been used as a primary procedure for socket reconstruction. In Group I DFG was carried out in usual procedure. In case of Group II, vascularized scar tissues were separated 360° and were fashioned into four strips. A scleral capped porous polyethylene implant was placed in the intraconal space and four strips of scar tissue were secured to the scleral cap and extended part overlapped the implant to make a twofold barrier between the implant and MMG. Patients were followed-up as per prefixed proforma. Prosthesis motility and retention between the two groups were measured. Results: In Group I, four patients had recurrence of contracture with fall out of prosthesis. In Group II stable reconstruction was achieved in all the patients. In terms of prosthesis motility, maximum in Group I was 39.2% and Group II, was 59.3%. The difference in prosthesis retention (P = 0.001) and motility (P = 0.004) between the two groups was significant. Conclusion: Primary socket reconstruction with porous orbital implant and MMG for severe socket contracture is an effective method in terms of prosthesis motility and prosthesis retention.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2254    
    Printed28    
    Emailed1    
    PDF Downloaded341    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal