Journal of Personalized Medicine (May 2023)

Comparison of Anatomical Preformed Titanium Implants and Patient-Specific CAD/CAM Implants in the Primary Reconstruction of Isolated Orbital Fractures—A Retrospective Study

  • Sebastian Pietzka,
  • Markus Wenzel,
  • Karsten Winter,
  • Frank Wilde,
  • Alexander Schramm,
  • Marcel Ebeling,
  • Robin Kasper,
  • Mario Scheurer,
  • Andreas Sakkas

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm13050846
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13, no. 5
p. 846

Abstract

Read online

Background/Aim: Reconstruction of the fractured orbit remains a challenge. The aim of this study was to compare anatomical preformed titanium orbital implants with patient-specific CAD/CAM implants for precision and intraoperative applicability. Material and Methods: A total of 75 orbital reconstructions from 2012 to 2022 were retrospectively assessed for their precision of implant position and intra- and postoperative revision rates. For this purpose, the implant position after digital orbital reconstruction was checked for deviations by mirroring the healthy orbit at 5 defined points, and the medical records of the patients were checked for revisions. Results: The evaluation of the 45 anatomical preformed orbital implant cases showed significantly higher deviations and an implant inaccuracy of 66.6% than the 30 CAD/CAM cases with only 10% inaccuracy. In particular, the CAD/CAM implants were significantly more precise in medial and posterior positioning. In addition, the intraoperative revision rates of 26.6% vs. 11% after 3D intraoperative imaging and the postoperative revision rates of 13% vs. 0 for the anatomical preformed implants were significantly higher than for patient-specific implants. Conclusion: We conclude that patient-specific CAD/CAM orbital implants are highly suitable for primary orbital reconstruction. These seem to be preferable to anatomical preformed implants in terms of precision and revision rates.

Keywords