| Title |
Generation of customized orbital implant templates using 3-dimensional printing for orbital wall reconstruction
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Eye, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41433-018-0193-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sunah Kang, Jaeyoung Kwon, Chan Joo Ahn, Bita Esmaeli, Guk Bae Kim, Namkug Kim, Ho-Seok Sa |
| Abstract |
To describe and evaluate a novel surgical approach to orbital wall reconstruction that uses three-dimensionally (3D) printed templates to mold a customized orbital implant. A review was conducted of 11 consecutive patients who underwent orbital wall reconstruction using 3D-printed customized orbital implant templates. In these procedures, the orbital implant was 3D pressed during surgery and inserted into the fracture site. The outcomes of this approach were analyzed quantitatively by measuring the orbital tissue volumes within the bony orbit using computed tomography. All 11 orbital wall reconstructions (6 orbital floor and 5 medial wall fractures) were successful with no post operative ophthalmic complications. Statistically significant differences were found between the preoperative and post operative orbital tissue volumes for the affected orbit (24.00 ± 1.74 vs 22.31 ± 1.90 cm3; P = 0.003). There was no statistically significant difference found between the tissue volume of the contralateral unaffected orbit and the affected orbit after reconstruction (22.01 ± 1.60 cm3 vs 22.31 ± 1.90 cm3; P = 0.182). 3D-printed customized orbital implant templates can be used to press and trim conventional implantable materials with patient-specific contours and sizes for optimal orbital wall reconstruction. It is difficult to design an orbital implant that exactly matches the shape and surface of a blowout fracture site due to the unique 3D structure of the orbit. The traditional surgical method is to visually inspect the fracture site and use eye measurements to cut a two-dimensional orbital implant that corresponds to the anatomical structure of the fracture site. However, implants that do not fit the anatomical structure of a fracture site well can cause complications such as enophthalmos, diplopia and displacement of the implant. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 21% |
| Unknown | 19 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 52% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 21 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 January 2019.
All research outputs
#18,804,356
of 23,968,814 outputs
Outputs from Eye
#3,337
of 4,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,772
of 338,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Eye
#54
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,968,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,411 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 338,024 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.