RSS-Feed abonnieren
PDF herunterladen
DOI: 10.1055/a-2534-2276
Acute and Complete Expulsion of a Porous Polyethylene Orbital Implant 14 Months after Primary Enucleation for Uveal Melanoma: A Case Report
Akute und vollständige Ausstoßung eines porösen Polyethylen-Orbitaimplantats 14 Monate nach primärer Enukleation wegen eines Uveamelanoms: Ein Fallbericht
Introduction
The removal of the eye, known as “enucleation,” is still a commonly used treatment strategy for intraocular malignancy such as uveal melanoma or retinoblastoma, the other major indications being severe trauma and a blind painful eye [1], [2]. To obtain optimal cosmesis and comfort, a “double” replacement technique is currently employed. During surgery, a spherical orbital implant is introduced into the anophthalmic socket, onto which the recti muscles are sutured to both replace the eye volume and maintain its motility [3]. Six to eight weeks later, once the conjunctival wound is healed, a cosmetic prosthesis, the “artificial eye,” with the shape of a shell made from glass or resin, is adapted, and placed in the conjunctival sac.
Publikationsverlauf
Eingereicht: 27. Oktober 2024
Angenommen: 24. Dezember 2024
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
16. April 2025
© 2025. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References
- 1 Chalasani R, Poole-Warren L, Conway RM. et al. Porous orbital implants in enucleation: a systematic review. Surv Ophthalmol 2007; 52: 145-155
- 2 Blaydon SM, Shepler TR, Neuhaus RW. et al. The porous polyethylene (Medpor) spherical orbital implant: a retrospective study of 136 cases. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 19: 364-371
- 3 Shields CL, Shields JA, De Potter P. et al. Lack of complications of the hydroxyapatite orbital implant in 250 consecutive cases. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 1993; 91: 177-189
- 4 Trichopoulos N, Augsburger J. Enucleation with unwrapped porous and nonporous orbital implants: a 15-year experience. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 2005; 21: 331-336
- 5 Lang P, Kim JW, McGovern K. et al. Porous orbital implant after enucleation in retinoblastoma patients: indications and complications. Orbit 2018; 37: 438-443
- 6 Long JA, Tann TM, Bearden WH. et al. Enucleation: is wrapping the implant necessary for optimal motility?. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 19: 194-197
- 7 Aronson RJ, Pumphrey SA, Robinson N. Unilateral eosinophilic cellulitis leading to implant extrusion after bilateral enucleation in a dog. Clin Case Rep 2022; 10: e05377
- 8 Sen M, Honavar SG. Orbital Implants. In: El Toukhy E. ed. Oculoplastic Surgery. Cham: Springer; 2020: 579-585
- 9 Remulla HD, Rubin PA, Shore JW. et al. Complications of porous spherical orbital implants. Ophthalmology 1995; 102: 586-593
- 10 Chen YH, Cui HG. High density porous polyethylene material (Medpor) as an unwrapped orbital implant. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B 2006; 7: 679-682
- 11 Ho VWM, Hussain RN, Czanner G. et al. Porous Versus Nonporous Orbital Implants After Enucleation for Uveal Melanoma: A Randomized Study. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 2017; 33: 452-458
- 12 Sagoo MS, Rose GE. Mechanisms and treatment of extruding intraconal implants: socket aging and tissue restitution (the “Cactus Syndrome”). Arch Ophthalmol 2007; 125: 1616-1620
- 13 Skouras A, Skouras G, Karypidis D. et al. The use of Medpor© alloplastic material in rhinoplasty: experience and outcomes. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2012; 65: 35-42
- 14 Kim JM, Sung JY, Lim HB. et al. Risk Factors for Orbital Implant Extrusion after Evisceration. J Clin Med 2021; 10: 3329
- 15 De Potter P, Duprez T, Cosnard G. Postcontrast magnetic resonance imaging assessment of porous polyethylene orbital implant (Medpor). Ophthalmology 2000; 107: 1656-1660