Osseointegrated Implants for Orbito-Facial Prostheses: Common Complications and Solutions.

Purpose: To evaluate anatomical and functional results of osseointegration with magnetic coupling for oculofacial prosthetic rehabilitation after exenteration.

Methods: This retrospective study included 11 consecutive patients who received orbital reconstruction and oculofacial prosthetic rehabilitation between September 2015 and October 2019. Patient demographics, surgical indications, previous treatment procedures, histopathologic features, and reconstructive procedures were recorded.

Giant osteomas: Clinical results and surgical approach from ophthalmic point of view.

Purpose: To present clinical ocular manifestations, radiological features and surgical results of giant paranasal osteomas involving the orbit.

Design: Retrospective, interventional, case series.

Methods: The study included patients treated for giant paranasal osteoma involving the orbit.

Evaluation of Lacrimal Drainage Function in the Anophthalmic Socket by Dacryoscintigraphy.

Purpose: To investigate whether impaired lacrimal pump function is a possible cause of discharge in patients wearing an artificial eye compared with the remaining healthy eye.

Methods: Consecutive patients wearing unilateral ocular prosthesis for ≥6 months were included in this retrospective study. Excluded were any deformities of eyelids or nasal passage, socket complications such as entropion, ectropion, ptosis, infection, pyogenic granuloma, contracted socket, obstruction of nasolacrimal duct diagnosed with lacrimal irrigation and a difference greater than 2 mm in terms of protrusion between two eyes detected by Hertel exophthalmometry.

Comparison of Three Different Techniques on the Movement of Implants After Evisceration.

Purpose: To compare the results of 3 evisceration techniques involving placement of an acrylic implant within the scleral shell without posterior sclerotomy (Group 1), posterior sclerotomy with placement of a porous implant within the intraconal space (Group 2) and posterior sclerotomy with placement of a acrylic implant within the intraconal space (Group 3) with respect to ocular mobility, implant complications and patient satisfaction.

Methods: Single-center, retrospective, interventional case series. A chart review of 72 patients undergoing evisceration between February 2013 and January 2018 was carried out.

Comparison of Medpor coated tear drainage tube versus silicon tear drainage tube in conjunctivodacryocystorhinostomy: problems and solutions.

Purpose: This study aims at comparing two different types of drainage tubes in conjunctivodacryocystorhinostomy, which are used for upper lacrimal system obstruction or damage, with respect to their respective postoperative problems and solutions.

Methods: Nineteen eyes of 17 patients who underwent conjunctivodacryocystorhinostomy (CDCR) or conjunctivorhinostomy (CR) surgery with a Medpor coated tear drainage tube or silicon tube placement between October, 2010, and February, 2014, were included in this retrospective comparative study.

Results: In the initial surgery, Medpor coated tear drainage tubes were used in 11 eyes by CDCR, whereas silicon tear drainage tubes were implanted into 2 eyes by CR and 6 eyes by CDCR.