首页> 外文期刊>Annals of King Edward Medical University. >Comparative Study of Evaluation of Results of Orbital Floor Reconstruction with Calvarial Bone Graft Vs Sialastic Implant
【24h】

Comparative Study of Evaluation of Results of Orbital Floor Reconstruction with Calvarial Bone Graft Vs Sialastic Implant

机译:颅骨骨移植与弹性植入物评估眶底重建效果的比较研究。

获取原文
           

摘要

Introduction: Orbital floor fractures can result in considerable facial deformity. A vast array of autogenous and alloplastic materials are being used to reconstruct Orbital floor defects. Amongst the alloplastic materials sialastic implants are most commonly being used for orbital floor reconstruction whilst among the autogenous bone grafts calvarial bone graft are commonly used. Unfortunately no study has been conducted in Pakistan to compare the post operative results of these two commonly used materials for orbital floor reconstruction. The aim of this study is to compare the results of orbital floor reconstruction using sialastic implants and calvarial bone graft in order to find out which of the two materials shows better post operative results. Methods: A Quasi experimental randomized trial was conducted from November 2006 to November 2007 in the department of Oral and Maxillofacial surgery, King Edward Medical University/Mayo Hospital, Lahore. A total of 60 patients were recruited over a period of 12 months. All patients were followed up at regular intervals i.e. 1 week, 2 weeks, 2 months and 6 months. The six month evaluation of Orbital floor reconstruction was done by noting the improvement in diplopia, enoph-thalmous and presence or absence of infection, extrusion, dislodgement in 30 cases with calvarial bone graft (group A) and in 30 cases with sialastic implants (group B). Results: Approximately 44% patients presented with one of the post operative complaints of diplopia, enophthalmous and both (diplopia and enophthalmous) at the 6 months follow up in group B as compared to only 17% patients with post operative complaints in group A (p = 0.05). Post operative complications i.e. infection, extrusion and dislodgement occurred in 43.4% patients from group B as compared to 20% patients from group A (p = 0.02). Conclusion: Reconstruction of orbital floor fracture with autogenous bone (calvarial bone) should be preferred as compared to reconstruction with the sialastic implants because of lesser post operative complications.
机译:简介:眼眶底骨折可导致面部畸形。大量的自体和同种异体材料被用于重建眶底缺损。在同种异体材料中,唾液弹性植入物最常用于眶底重建,而在自体骨移植物中,常使用颅盖骨移植物。不幸的是,巴基斯坦尚未进行任何研究来比较这两种常用的眶底重建材料的术后结果。这项研究的目的是比较使用唾液弹性植入物和颅骨植骨重建眶底重建的结果,以找出两种材料中哪种显示出更好的术后效果。方法:2006年11月至2007年11月在拉合尔国王爱德华医科大学/梅奥医院口腔颌面外科进行了一项准实验随机试验。在12个月内招募了60位患者。所有患者均定期接受随访,即1周,2周,2个月和6个月。眼底重建的六个月评估是通过注意到30例颅盖骨植骨(A组)和30例唾液弹性植入物(A组)在复视,食管下和感染的存在与否,挤压,脱位的改善方面进行的。 B)。结果:B组随访6个月时,有近视眼,复眼和双眼复视(复视和眼内)之一的患者占44%,而A组仅17%的患者术后有抱怨。 = 0.05)。术后并发症,即B组的43.4%的患者发生感染,挤压和脱位,而A组的这一比例为20%(p = 0.02)。结论:与自体植入物相比,自体骨(颅骨)重建眶底骨折应优先考虑,因为术后并发症较少。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号