4.7 Article

Three-Dimensional Analysis of Isolated Orbital Floor Fractures Pre- and Post-Reconstruction with Standard Titanium Meshes and Hybrid Patient-Specific Implants

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 9, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm9051579

关键词

orbital fracture; blow-out fracture; orbital volume; hybrid patient-specific; orbital implant; 3D-printing

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of the intraoperative bending of titanium mesh with the efficacy of pre-contoured hybrid patient-specific titanium mesh for the surgical repair of isolated orbital floor fractures. In-house 3D-printed anatomical models were used as bending guides. The main outcome measures were preoperative and postoperative orbital volume and surgery time. We performed a retrospective cohort study including 22 patients who had undergone surgery between May 2016 and November 2018. The first twelve patients underwent conventional reconstruction with intraoperative free-hand bending of an orbital floor mesh plate. The subsequent ten patients received pre-contoured plates based on 3D-printed orbital models that were produced by mirroring the non-fractured orbit of the patient using a medical imaging software. We compared the preoperative and postoperative absolute volume difference (unfractured orbit, fractured orbit), the fracture area, the fracture collapse, and the effective surgery time between the two groups. In comparison to the intraoperative bending of titanium mesh, the application of preformed plates based on a 3D-printed orbital model resulted in a non-significant absolute volume difference in the intervention group (p = 0.276) and statistically significant volume difference in the conventional group (p = 0.002). Further, there was a significant reduction of the surgery time (57.3 +/- 23.4 min versus 99.8 +/- 28.9 min, p = 0.001). The results of this study suggest that the use of 3D-printed orbital models leads to a more accurate reconstruction and a time reduction during surgery.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据