Customized orbital implant versus 3D preformed titanium mesh for orbital fracture repair: A retrospective comparative analysis of orbital reconstruction accuracy

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the accuracy of inferomedial orbital fracture restoration using customized orbital implant versus 3D preformed titanium mesh. Patients were divided into two groups. Group 1 underwent surgery with customized orbital implants and intraoperative navigation, while group 2 was treated using 3D preformed titanium meshes with preoperative virtual surgical planning (VSP) and intraoperative navigation. Reconstruction accuracy was assessed by: (1) comparing the postoperative reconstruction mesh position with the preoperative VSP; and (2) measuring the difference between the reconstructed and unaffected orbital volume. Pre- and postoperative diplopia and enophthalmos were also evaluated. Fifty-two patients were enrolled (25 in group 1 vs 27 in group 2). The mean difference between final plate position and ideal digital plan was 0.62 mm (SD = 0.235) in group 1 and 0.69 mm (SD = 0.246) in group 2, with no statistical difference between the groups (p = 0.282). The mean volume differences between the reconstructed and unaffected orbits were 0.95 ml and 1.02 ml in group 1 and group 2, respectively, with no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.860). Overall clinical improvements, as well as complications, were similar. 3D preformed titanium meshes can reconstruct inferomedial fractures with the same accuracy as customized implants. Therefore, in clinical practice, it is recommended to use 3D preformed meshes for this type of fracture due to their excellent results and the potential for reducing time and costs.

Keywords: Blow-out fracture; Computer-assisted surgery; Customized orbital implant; Intraoperative navigation; Orbital fracture; Preformed titanium mesh.