These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Biomaterials for repair of orbital floor blowout fractures: a systematic review.
    Author: Gunarajah DR, Samman N.
    Journal: J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2013 Mar; 71(3):550-70. PubMed ID: 23422151.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To evaluate the reported use and outcomes of implant materials used for the restoration of post-traumatic orbital floor defects in adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search of the English literature was performed in the databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. The study selection process was adapted from the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, and 55 articles complied with the study inclusion criteria. The primary outcome measures were diplopia, enophthalmos, graft extrusion/displacement, and infection related to the graft material. The secondary outcome measures were infraorbital paresthesia, orbital dystopia, orbital soft tissue entrapment, and donor-site complications. RESULTS: Of 55 articles, 41 (74.5%) evaluated were retrospective case series, 9 (16.4%) were retrospective case-control studies, 3 (5.5%) were controlled trials, and 2 (3.6%) were prospective case series. Autogenous graft materials were predominantly used in 19 studies, alloplastic materials were used in 33 studies, and the remaining 3 articles reported on allogeneic materials. Overall, 19 different types of implant materials were used in 2,483 patients. Of 827 patients with diplopia before surgery, 151 (18.3%) had diplopia postoperatively. Of 449 patients with enophthalmos before surgery, 134 (29.8%) had enophthalmos postoperatively. Only 2 patients (0.1%) and 14 patients (0.6%) had graft extrusion/displacement and infection related to the graft material, respectively; alloplastic biomaterials were used in all of these cases. CONCLUSIONS: All graft materials used were successful to variable degrees because all studies reported improvement in terms of the recorded outcome measures. A guideline for choice of implant material based on defect size was developed.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]