About OJO | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Author Instructions | Reviewer Guidelines | Online submissionLogin 
Oman Journal of Ophthalmology Oman Journal of Ophthalmology
  Editorial Board | Subscribe | Advertise | Contact
https://www.omanophthalmicsociety.org/ Users Online: 773  Wide layoutNarrow layoutFull screen layout Home Print this page  Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 87-90

Orbital implant exposure following enucleation or evisceration


1 Department of Ophthalmology, Al Nahdha Hospital, Muscat, Oman
2 Department of Ophthalmology, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman

Correspondence Address:
Huda Abdullah Al-Farsi
Al Nahdha Hospital, Ruwi, Muscat
Oman
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ojo.OJO_156_2016

Rights and Permissions

PURPOSE: To study the exposure rate of orbital implant postenucleation or evisceration procedures in two tertiary hospitals in Oman. DESIGN: A retrospective, descriptive, cross-section study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients' records were reviewed for patients' demographics, surgical indications, implant types, follow-up and any reported complications after surgeries. Patients with a minimum of 1 year follow-up period were selected. All patients who underwent enucleation or evisceration with primary orbital implant were included in the study. Patients who underwent secondary orbital implant were excluded from the study. RESULTS: A total of 37 patients (age between 4 and 88-year-old, median age is 54-year-old) underwent enucleation or evisceration during 2008–2014. The most common indications for the surgical intervention were painful blind eye (35%), followed by trauma (16%), and perforated corneal ulcer (16%). Out of 37 patients, hydroxyapatite implant was implanted in 17 patients (46%), a glass or acrylic implant was implanted in 17 patients (46%), bioceramic implant was implanted in two patients (5%), and Molteno prosthesis was implanted in one patient (3%). There was no case of orbital implant exposure in any patients in this study. CONCLUSIONS: No orbital implant exposure was recorded in this study. The surgical technique, end to end rectus muscles suturing, used for enucleation/evisceration was the main reason for reduced implant exposure. In addition, the preexisting ocular pathology did not affect the outcome of the study.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1632    
    Printed21    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded90    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal