흡수성과 비흡수성 안와 내 삽입물을 이용한 안와 내벽골절 수술결과: 비교 연구
Reconstruction of Orbital Medial Wall Fracture with Absorbable and Non-Absorbable Orbital Implant: Comparative Study
- 대한안과학회
- 대한안과학회지
- Ophthalmological Society,volume55,number5
-
2014.05640 - 645 (6 pages)
- 6
Purpose: To compare the surgical results and complications of medial wall fracture reconstruction using non-absorbable porous polyethylene implants (Medpor<sup>®, Stryker Instruments, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA) and an absorbable polymer of polyglycolic acid (PGA) and polylactic acid (PLA) (Mesh plate<sup>®, Inion Ltd, Tampere, Finland). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients who underwent reconstruction of medial wall fracture between January 2007 and June 2012 and divided them into 2 groups according to orbital implant type (Medpor<sup>®, Mesh plate<sup>®). Results: Among the 86 patients, 37 were treated with Medpor<sup>® and 49 with Mesh plate<sup>®. There was no statistically significant difference in limitation of motion or diplopia score between the 2 groups at postoperative 6 months (Fisher's exact test,<em> p</em> = 0.192, <em>p</em> = 0.128, respectively). Mean postoperative exophthalmometry differences between the eyes were 0.49 ± 1.04 mm and 0.37 ± 0.62 mm in Medpor<sup>® and Mesh plate<sup>® groups, respectively, showing no statistically significant difference (independent t-test, <em>p</em> = 0.512). Postoperative complications such as inflammation or implant malposition were observed only in 3 patients in the Medpor<sup>® group. Conclusions: No difference was observed between Medpor<sup>® and Mesh plate<sup>® in terms of surgical results during the postoperative 6 month period after reconstruction of orbital medial wall fracture. However, postoperative complications were observed in 3 patients in the Medpor<sup>® group. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc 2014;55(5):640-645
(0)
(0)