Biocompatible Materials for Orbital Wall Reconstruction—An Overview

Abstract

The reconstruction of an orbit after complex craniofacial fractures can be extremely demanding. For satisfactory functional and aesthetic results, it is necessary to restore the orbital walls and the craniofacial skeleton using various types of materials. The reconstruction materials can be divided into autografts (bone or cartilage tissue) or allografts (metals, ceramics, or plastic materials, and combinations of these materials). Over time, different types of materials have been used, considering characteristics such as their stability, biocompatibility, cost, safety, and intraoperative flexibility. Although the ideal material for orbital reconstruction could not be unanimously identified, much progress has been achieved in recent years. In this article, we summarise the advantages and disadvantages of each category of reconstruction materials. We also provide an update on improvements in material properties through various modern processing techniques. Good results in reconstructive surgery of the orbit require both material and technological innovations.

Application of 3D printed pelvic fracture related urethra and surrounding tissue as preoperative planning model

“…A wide range of materials can be used for 3D printing, including metals, hydrogels, etc. However, the most stable 3D printing material available at present is polycaprolactone [ 11 , 12 ].…”

Orbital Soft Tissue Displacement After Blow-Out Fracture Repair Using Poly (L-Lactide-Co-Glycolide) Polymer Plates Based on Image Fusion Technique

“…9 Along with the rapid development of tissue engineering, bioresorbable materials have become a hotspot and have been applied widely in clinic. 4 A 10-year retrospective study demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of bioresorbable materials in orbital fracture surgical repair. 10 Seen et al 11 also proved that bioresorbable materials have comparative safety and effectiveness in isolated BOF.…”

Virtual Planning and 3D Printing in the Management of Acute Orbital Fractures and Post-Traumatic Deformities

“…Other advantages to custom 3D-printed implants are shortened intraoperative times, reduced length of anesthesia, and greater precision in restoration of orbital volume to match the unaffected orbit. 9 In addition, the revision rates of orbital reconstruction using 3D-printed models and PSI were lower compared with reconstruction with standard implants. 20 One of the challenges to using PSIs has been cost.…”

“…Several alloplastic materials are available for reconstructing simple, single wall defects, such as Medpor (Stryker, MI), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), silicone, preshaped titanium plates (Synthes/DePuySynthes, KLS Martin, Stryker), titanium mesh, and resorbable materials such as polydioxanone sulfate membrane (Ethicon, Norderstedt, Germany). 8,9 Bone grafts were used in the past but have been associated with unpredictable resorption rates and increased donor site morbidity, thus limiting their current use in favor of alloplastic material. 10,11 Medpor is a nonresorbable, porous polyethylene implant that is easy to shape and has had similar results as bone tissue with fewer infection rates.…”

“…10 11 Medpor is a nonresorbable, porous polyethylene implant that is easy to shape and has had similar results as bone tissue with fewer infection rates. 9 Titanium mesh implants have been used since 1992 to correct orbital wall fractures of moderate to large size and have the advantage of being radio-opaque and radiologically visible. The main complication of titanium mesh is difficult removal in cases of infection due to tissue growing within the gaps of the mesh.…”