Amplitude of movements with conical or spherical implants in anophthalmic socket

References

• Custer PL, Kennedy RH, Woog JJ, Kaltreider SA, Meyer DR. Orbital implants in enucleation surgery: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology. 2003;110(10):2054–2061. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(03)00857-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson RL, Yen MT, Lucci LM, Caruso RT. The quasi-integrated porous polyethylene orbital implant. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;18(1):50–55. doi:10.1097/00002341-200201000-00008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Su GW, Yen MT. Current trends in managing the anophthalmic socket after primary enucleation and evisceration. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;20(4):274–280. doi:10.1097/01.IOP.0000129528.16938.1E.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iatsenko O, and Tiurin IE. Orbital radiographic anatomy. Part 1. The osseous orbit and its apex. Vestn Rentgenol Radiol. 2015;(3):5–11. doi:10.20862/0042-4676-2015-0-3-5-11/. PMID: 26302616.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lukats O, Vizkelety T, Markella Z, Maka E, Kiss M, Dobai A, et al. Measurement of orbital volume after enucleation and orbital implantation. PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e50333. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0050333.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubin PAD, Popham J, Rumelt S, Remulla H, Bilyk JR, Holds J, et al. Enhancement of the cosmetic and functional outcome of enucleation with the conical orbital implant. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:919–925. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(98)95038-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kang MJ, Jung SK, Cho WK, Paik JS, Yang SW. Long-term surgical outcomes of the multipurpose conical porous synthetic orbital implant. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2015;29(5):294–300. doi:10.3341/kjo.2015.29.5.294.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hoyama E. 2013. Cavidade anoftálmica. In: Alves MR, editors. Órbita, sistema lacrimal e oculoplástica, Chap 1. Rio de Janeiro: Cultura Médica. p. 45–56.
   Google Scholar
• Brandão SM, Schellini RA, Peitl O, Zanotto ED, Matayoshi S, Meneghim RLFS, et al. Conical biosilicate implant for volume augmentation in anophthalmic sockets. J Craniofac Surg. 2020;31(6):1838–1840. doi:10.1097/SCS.0000000000006692.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krishna G. Contracted sockets – i (Aetiology and types). Indian J Ophthalmol. 1980;28:117–120.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smerdon DL, Sutton GA. Analysis of the factors involved in cosmetic failure following excision of the eye. Br J Ophthalmol. 1988;72(10):768–773. doi:10.1136/bjo.72.10.768.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kawai S, Suzuki T, Kawai K. Mobility of hydroxyapatite orbital implant covered with autologous sclera. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2000;44(1):68–74. doi:10.1016/S0021-5155(99)00170-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klett A, Guthoff R. Wie lässt sich die Prothesenmotilität verbessern? Der Ophthalmologe. 2003;100:445–448. doi:10.1007/s00347-003-0837-8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lucci LMD, Hoffing-Lima AL, Erwenne CM, Cassano EMT. Artificial eye amplitudes and characteristics in enucleated sockets with porous polyethylene spherical and quad-motility implants. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2007;70(5):831–838. doi:10.1590/S0004-27492007000500019.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nerad JA, Hurtig RR, Carter KD, Bulgarelli DM, Yeager DC. A system for measurement of prosthetic eye movements using a magnetic search coil technique. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1991;7(1):31–40. doi:10.1097/00002341-199103000-00004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colen TP, Paridaens DA, Lemij HG, Mourits MP, van Den Bosch WA. Comparison of artificial eye amplitudes with acrylic and hydroxyapatite spherical enucleation implants. Ophthalmology. 2000;107(10):1889–1894. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(00)00348-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smit TJ, Koornneef L, Zonneveld FW, Groet E, Otto AJ. Computed tomography in the assessment of the post-enucleation socket syndrome. Ophthalmology. 1990;97(10):1347–1351. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(90)32411-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Troutman RC. Five-year survey on use of a magnetic implant for improving cosmetic result of enucleation. Arch Ophthalmol. 1954;52:58–62. doi:10.1001/archopht.1954.00920050060006.
   Google Scholar
• Roper-Hall MJ. Orbital implants. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK. 1954;74:337–346.
   Google Scholar
• Collin JRO. Socket surgery. In: Collin JRO, editors. A Manual of Systematic Eyelid Surgery. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1989:121–137.
   Google Scholar
• Tyers AG, Collin JR. Baseball orbital implants: a review of 39 patients. Br J Ophthalmol. 1985;69(6):438–442. doi:10.1136/bjo.69.6.438.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen L, Ferguson EC, Braley AE. A quasi-integrated buried muscle cone implant with good motility and advantages for prosthetic fitting. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol. 1960;64:272–286.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Spivey BE, Allen L, Burns CA. The Iowa enucleation implant. A 10-year evaluation of techniques and results. Am J Ophthalmol. 1969;67(2):171–188. doi:10.1016/0002-9394(69)93147-X.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goulgelmann HP. The evolution of the ocular motility implant. Int Ophthalmol Clinics. 1970;10:689–703.
   Google Scholar
• Jordan DR, Anderson RL, Nerad JA, Allen L. A preliminary report on the universal implant. Arch Ophthalmol. 1987;105(12):1726–1731. doi:10.1001/archopht.1987.01060120124039.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Christenbury JD. Use of Proplast II. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1991;7:223.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guthoff R, Vick HP, Schaudig U. Prevention of post-enucleation syndrome: the hydroxylapatite silicone implant. Preliminary experimental studies and initial clinical experiences. Ophthalmologe. 1995;92:198–205.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jordan DR, Anderson RL. The universal implant for evisceration surgery. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997;13:1–7. doi:10.1097/00002341-199703000-00001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan DR, Klapper SR. Surgical techniques in enucleation: the role of various types of implants and the efficacy of pegged and non-pegged approaches. Int Ophthalmol Clin. 2006;46(1):109–132. doi:10.1097/01.iio.0000195854.93205.92.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Baino F, Perero S, Ferraris S, Miola M, Balagna C, Verne E, et al. Biomaterials for orbital implants and ocular prostheses: over- view and future prospects. Acta Biomater. 2014;10(3):1064–1087. doi:10.1016/j.actbio.2013.12.014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perry AC. Integrated orbital implants. Adv Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1990;8:75–81.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goldberg RA, Holds JB, Ebrahimpour J. Exposed hydroxyapatite orbital implants: report of six cases. Ophthalmology. 1992;99(5):831–836. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(92)31920-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim YD, Goldberg RA, Shorr N, Steinsapir KD. Management of exposed hydroxyapatite orbital implants. Ophthalmology. 1994;101(10):1709–1715. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(94)31112-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shields CL, Shields JA, De Potter P, Singh AD. Problems with the hydroxyapatite orbital implant: experience with 250 consecutive cases. Br J Ophthalmol. 1994;78(9):702–706. doi:10.1136/bjo.78.9.702.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ainbinder DJ, Haik BG, Tellado M. Hydroxyapatite orbital implant abscess: histopathologic correlation of an infected implant following evisceration. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1994;10(4):267–270. doi:10.1097/00002341-199412000-00009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan DR, Brownstein S, Jolly SS. Abscessed hydroxyapatite orbital implants. A report of two cases. Ophthalmology. 1996;103(11):1784–1787. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(96)30427-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oestreicher JH, Liu E, Berkowitz M. Complications of hydroxyapatite orbital implants. A review of 100 consecutive cases and a comparison of Dexon mesh (polyglycolic acid) with scleral wrapping. Ophthalmology. 1997;104(2):324–329. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(97)30316-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sousa RLF, Schellini SA, Zornoff DCM, Padovani CR. Condutas para reparação da cavidade anoftálmica no Brasil. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2012;75(6):394–397. doi:10.1590/S0004-27492012000600004.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rubin PAD, Fay AM, Heidi D, Remulla HD. Primary placement of motility coupling post in porous polyethylene orbital. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118:826–832. doi:10.1001/archopht.118.6.826.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marshak H, Dresner SC. Multipurpose conical orbital implant in evisceration. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;21(5):376–378. doi:10.1097/01.iop.0000173191.24824.40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar