Integrated Orbital Implants—A Comparison of Hydroxyapatite and Porous Polyethylene Implants

@article{Sadiq2008IntegratedOI,
  title={Integrated Orbital Implants—A Comparison of Hydroxyapatite and Porous Polyethylene Implants},
  author={S. Ahmed Sadiq and L S Mengher and John Lowry and Richard N. Downes},
  journal={Orbit},
  year={2008},
  volume={27},
  pages={37 - 40}
}
Purpose: A retrospective case note review was undertaken to elucidate any differences in the cosmetic results and rate of serious complications between hydroxyapatite (HA) and porous polyethylene (PP) orbital implants. Methods: Patients who had undergone orbital implant surgery during the period 1993 to 1997 by a single surgeon were identified. Twenty-six patients had an HA implant and twenty-six had received a PP implant. All patients were reviewed in the ocular prosthetics department in a… 

The Bioceramic Implant: Evaluation of Implant Exposures in 419 Implants

This review discovered an implant exposure rate of 9.1%, with the majority of the exposures occurring after the postoperative follow-up period, which means patients with porous orbital implants should be followed on a long-term basis to detect this complication.

Exposure Rate of Smooth Surface Tunnel Porous Polyethylene Implants After Enucleation

The theoretical advantage of a smooth anterior surface may indeed lead to a lower rate of exposure compared with standard unwrapped porous materials as demonstrated by the relatively low exposure rate using this implant.

Comparison of complication rates of porous anophthalmic orbital implants.

Porous polyethylene and aluminum oxide implants were associated with higher exposure rates and higher overall complication rates compared to hydroxyapatite implants and may be a risk factor for several anophthalmic clinical outcomes.

Unwrapped hydroxyapatite orbital implants: our experience in 347 cases

A low rate of implant exposure indicates that absence of wrapping material around hydroxyapatite orbital implants does not compromise surgical outcomes and has the added benefit of reduced surgical time and avoidance of complications from wrapping materials.

Comparison of the Exposure Rate of Wrapped Hydroxyapatite (Bio-Eye) Versus Unwrapped Porous Polyethylene (Medpor) Orbital Implants in Enucleated Patients

Unwrapped porous polyethylene implants demonstrated a higher rate of exposure, and longer time interval to exposure, compared with wrapped hydroxyapatite implants in enucleated patients.

Hydroxyapatite versus polyethylene orbital implants for patients undergoing enucleation for uveal melanoma.

  • D. ChaoJ. Harbour
  • Medicine
    Canadian journal of ophthalmology. Journal canadien d'ophtalmologie
  • 2015

Comparison of pre-bent titanium mesh versus polyethylene implants in patient specific orbital reconstructions

This study of 6 months functional result assessment of pre-bent individual implants and CNC milled ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene of the orbital wall has shown it to be a predictable reconstruction method.

Rate of Vascularization and Exposure of Silicone-capped Porous Polyethylene Spherical Implants: An Animal Model

Silicone-capped porous polyethylene orbital implants appear to offer an inexpensive, easy-to-manufacture implant that resists exposure without the need for a wrapping material and achieves successful biointegration soon after implantation.

Biomaterials for orbital implants and ocular prostheses: overview and future prospects.

Treatment of the anophthalmic socket

Implant materials and wrapping, surgical technique and treatment of lid malpositions associated with postenucleation socket syndrome are all factors affecting the rehabilitation of patients with anophthalmia.

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 10 REFERENCES

Problems with the hydroxyapatite orbital implant: experience with 250 consecutive cases.

The hydroxyapatite integrated orbital implant is a well tolerated motility implant without the high rate of extrusion and infection seen with other motility implants.

Porous orbital implants and their behaviour during drilling.

The results confirm that the drilling of porous polyethylene using this technique is unlikely to be successful, as loss of the porous structure would prevent stable epithelialisation of the drill hole, resulting in exposure of the implant.

Current Techniques of Enucleation: A Survey of 5,439 Intraorbital Implants and a Review of the Literature

Summary Enucleation is a commonly performed procedure. A multitude of intraorbital implants are available for use following enucleation. Each has advantages and disadvantages. This survey report

Current Trends in Managing the Anophthalmic Socket After Primary Enucleation and Evisceration

In managing the anophthalmic socket, ASOPRS survey respondents preferred to use the porous polyethylene implant after primary enucleation and evisceration, and most surgeons preferred not to place a motility post or peg in the implant.

Different fibrovascularization rate between coralline hydroxyapatite and high density porous polyethylene (Medpore) measured by 99mTc-MDP bone scintigraphy 6 months after intraorbital implantation

Comparing the fibrovascular ingrowth rates of orbital implants between coralline hydroxyapatite and high density porous polyethylene (Medpore) showed that groups with corallines appearing to achieve complete fibrov vascularization at a much more rapid rate than those with Medpore.

Assessment of the anophthalmic socket with dynamic cine-MRI

Cine magnetic resonance images were acquired in a group of patients with a variety of orbital implants after enucleation or evisceration. thereby allowing direct visualisation of the

Drilling of a porous polyethylene orbital implant

  • Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci
  • 1996