Primary Versus Secondary Intraorbital Implants
Ton J. Smit, Leo Koornneef, Maarten P. Mourits, Erica Groet, A. J. Otto
Abstract
Ton J. Smit, Leo Koornneef, Maarten P. Mourits, Erica Groet, A. J. Otto
Abstract
To compare the results of primary and secondary intraorbital implants after enucleation, we retrospectively studied the surgical outcomes of 114 patients. In 44 patients the implant was inserted immediately after enucleation and in the remaining 70 patients the implant was inserted at a later date. To achieve a satisfactory cosmetic result, additional procedures were needed in 11% of the patients with a primary implant and in 49% of those with a secondary implant. The insertion of an implant at the time of enucleation has distinct advantages over the insertion of the implant at a later date.
OpenAlex reports 29 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
To compare the results of primary and secondary intraorbital implants after enucleation, we retrospectively studied the surgical outcomes of 114 patients. In 44 patients the implant was inserted immediately after enucleation and in the remaining 70 patients the implant was inserted at a later date. To achieve a satisfactory cosmetic result, additional procedures were needed in 11% of the patients with a primary implant and in 49% of those with a secondary implant. The insertion of an implant at the time of enucleation has distinct advantages over the insertion of the implant at a later date.
Key concepts: Enucleation, Medicine, Implant, Eye Enucleation, Surgery, Dentistry