Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Anterior surface breakdown following evisceration : "Classic", "scleral modification", and "scleral patch techniques"].

Authors: J W C, Vijlbrief; F, Hafezi; D, Paridaens;

[Anterior surface breakdown following evisceration : "Classic", "scleral modification", and "scleral patch techniques"].

Abstract

To evaluate the frequency of anterior surface breakdown for three techniques of evisceration with primary implant placement: the "classic" technique, the "scleral modification" technique, and the novel "scleral patch" technique.Retrospective comparative case series with 73 consecutive eviscerations with primary implants that were performed in the Eye Clinic Rotterdam between January 2003 and January 2007.The operations involved the classic technique for 55% of the patients, scleral modification for 29%, and the novel scleral patch technique for 16%. In all, 9.6% of the patients had conjunctival breakdown: six in the classic group and one in the patch group. Although the frequency of this complication was higher in the classic group, the difference was not significant (P>0.05, chi-square test). Anterior surface breakdown was not related to implant size or prior eye surgery.Compared with the scleral modification and scleral patch techniques, conjunctival breakdown and implant extrusion were seen more frequently after classic evisceration with implant placement. Implant size or indication for surgery were not related to the frequency of these complications.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Adult, Aged, 80 and over, Male, Eye, Artificial, Suture Techniques, Middle Aged, Prosthesis Design, Prosthesis Failure, Young Adult, Postoperative Complications, Risk Factors, Humans, Female, Eye Evisceration, Sclera, Aged, Follow-Up Studies, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    3
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
3
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!