Ophthalmology
Volume 115, Issue 3 , Pages 566-572.e2 , March 2008

Exposure Rate of Hydroxyapatite Orbital Implants: A 15-Year Experience of 802 Cases

Presented at: American Academy of Ophthalmology Annual Meeting, November 2006, Las Vegas, Nevada.

  • Jin Sook Yoon, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Ophthalmology, Institute of Vision Research, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
    • ,
  • Helen Lew, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Ophthalmology, Pochun CHA University College of Medicine, Pundang CHA Hospital, Sungnam, Korea.
    • ,
  • Sung Joo Kim, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Ophthalmology, Konyang University College of Medicine, Kim’s Eye Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
    • ,
  • Sang Yeul Lee, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Ophthalmology, Institute of Vision Research, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence to Sang Yeul Lee, MD, Department of Ophthalmology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, CPO Box 8044, Seodaemoongu Shinchondong 134, Seoul, Korea 120-752.

Received 24 January 2007 ,Revised 6 June 2007 ,Accepted 6 June 2007.

References 

  1. Perry AC. Integrated orbital implants. Adv Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1990;8:75–81
  2. Dutton JJ. Coralline hydroxyapatite as an ocular implant. Ophthalmology. 1991;98:370–377
  3. Shields CL, Shields JA, De Potter P, Singh AD. Lack of complications of the hydroxyapatite orbital implant in 250 consecutive cases. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1993;91:177–189
  4. Remulla HD, Rubin PA, Shore JW, et al. Complications of porous spherical orbital implants. Ophthalmology. 1995;102:586–593
  5. Buettner H, Bartley GB. Tissue breakdown and exposure associated with orbital hydroxyapatite implants. Am J Ophthalmol. 1992;113:669–673
  6. Nunery WR, Heinz GW, Bonnin JM, et al. Exposure rate of hydroxyapatite spheres in the anophthalmic socket: histopathologic correlation and comparison with silicone sphere implants. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 1993;9:96–104
  7. Jordan DR, Gilberg S, Bawazeer A. Coralline hydroxyapatite orbital implant (Bio-Eye): experience with 158 patients. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;20:69–74
  8. Jordan DR. Problems after evisceration surgery with porous orbital implants: experience with 86 patients. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;20:374–380
  9. Su GW, Yen MT. Current trends in managing the anophthalmic socket after primary enucleation and evisceration. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;20:274–280
  10. Lee SY, Kwon OW, Hong YJ, et al. Modification of the scleral openings to reduce tissue breakdown and exposure after hydroxyapatite implantations. Ophthalmologica. 1995;209:319–322
  11. Custer PL, Trinkaus KM, Fornoff J. Comparative motility of hydroxyapatite and alloplastic enucleation implants. Ophthalmology. 1999;106:513–516
  12. Kaltreider SA, Jacobs JL, Hughes MO. Predicting the ideal implant size before enucleation. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 1999;15:37–43
  13. Lee SY, Jang JW, Lew H, et al. Complications in motility peg placement for hydroxyapatite orbital implant in anophthalmic socket. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2002;46:103–107
  14. Christmas NJ, Gordon CD, Murray TG, et al. Intraorbital implants after enucleation and their complications: a 10-year review. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116:1199–1203
  15. Arat YO, Shetlar DJ, Boniuk M. Bovine pericardium versus homologous sclera as a wrapping for hydroxyapatite orbital implants. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003;19:189–193
  16. Lee SY, Kim HY, Kim SJ, Kang SJ. Human dura mater as a wrapping material for hydroxyapatite implantation in the anophthalmic socket. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers. 1997;28:428–431
  17. Hoshi K, Yoshino H, Urata J, et al. Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease associated with cadaveric dura mater grafts in Japan. Neurology. 2000;55:718–721
  18. Oestreicher JH, Liu E, Berkowitz M. Complications of hydroxyapatite orbital implants: a review of 100 consecutive cases and a comparison of Dexon mesh (polyglycolic acid) with scleral wrapping. Ophthalmology. 1997;104:324–329
  19. Jordan DR, Allen LH, Ells A, et al. The use of Vicryl mesh (polyglactin 910) for implantation of hydroxyapatite orbital implants. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 1995;11:95–99
  20. Jordan DR, Klapper SR, Gilberg SM. The use of vicryl mesh in 200 porous orbital implants: a technique with few exposures. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003;19:53–61
  21. Gayre GS, Lipham W, Dutton JJ. A comparison of rates of fibrovascular ingrowth in wrapped versus unwrapped hydroxyapatite spheres in a rabbit model. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;18:275–280
  22. Jordan DR, Ells A, Brownstein S, et al. Vicryl-mesh wrap for the implantation of hydroxyapatite orbital implants: an animal model. Can J Ophthalmol. 1995;30:241–246
  23. Heimann H, Bechrakis NE, Zepeda LC, et al. Exposure of orbital implants wrapped with polyester-urethane after enucleation for advanced retinoblastoma. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;21:123–128
  24. Kim YD, Goldberg RA, Shorr N, Steinsapir KD. Management of exposed hydroxyapatite orbital implants. Ophthalmology. 1994;101:1709–1715
  25. Hornblass A, Biesman BS, Eviatar JA. Current techniques of enucleation: a survey of 5,439 intraorbital implants and a review of the literature. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 1995;11:77–86
  26. Jordan DR, Klapper SR. A new titanium peg system for hydroxyapatite orbital implants. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;16:380–387

 The authors have no commercial or proprietary interest in the products or companies mentioned in the article.

 Manuscript no. 2007-110.

PII: S0161-6420(07)00666-5

doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.06.014

Ophthalmology
Volume 115, Issue 3 , Pages 566-572.e2 , March 2008

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution