Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models
The present study aimed to analyze if a preformed “hybrid” patient-specific orbital mesh provides a more accurate reconstruction of the orbital floor and a better functional outcome than a standardized, intraoperatively adapted titanium implant. Thirty patients who had undergone surgical reconstruct...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Guido R. Sigron [verfasserIn] Marina Barba [verfasserIn] Frédérique Chammartin [verfasserIn] Bilal Msallem [verfasserIn] Britt-Isabelle Berg [verfasserIn] Florian M. Thieringer [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2021 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Journal of Clinical Medicine - MDPI AG, 2013, 10(2021), 16, p 3509 |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:10 ; year:2021 ; number:16, p 3509 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.3390/jcm10163509 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
DOAJ049117610 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | DOAJ049117610 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20240412163438.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230227s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.3390/jcm10163509 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)DOAJ049117610 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)DOAJ71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
100 | 0 | |a Guido R. Sigron |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models |
264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a The present study aimed to analyze if a preformed “hybrid” patient-specific orbital mesh provides a more accurate reconstruction of the orbital floor and a better functional outcome than a standardized, intraoperatively adapted titanium implant. Thirty patients who had undergone surgical reconstruction for isolated, unilateral orbital floor fractures between May 2016 and November 2018 were included in this study. Of these patients, 13 were treated conventionally by intraoperative adjustment of a standardized titanium mesh based on assessing the fracture’s shape and extent. For the other 17 patients, an individual three-dimensional (3D) anatomical model of the orbit was fabricated with an in-house 3D-printer. This model was used as a template to create a so-called “hybrid” patient-specific titanium implant by preforming the titanium mesh before surgery. The functional and cosmetic outcome in terms of diplopia, enophthalmos, ocular motility, and sensory disturbance trended better when “hybrid” patient-specific titanium meshes were used but with statistically non-significant differences. The 3D-printed anatomical models mirroring the unaffected orbit did not delay the surgery’s timepoint. Nonetheless, it significantly reduced the surgery duration compared to the traditional method (58.9 (SD: 20.1) min versus 94.8 (SD: 33.0) min, <i<p</i<-value = 0.003). This study shows that using 3D-printed anatomical models as a supporting tool allows precise and less time-consuming orbital reconstructions with clinical benefits. | ||
650 | 4 | |a orbital fracture | |
650 | 4 | |a blow-out fracture | |
650 | 4 | |a orbital reconstruction | |
650 | 4 | |a functional outcome | |
650 | 4 | |a patient-specific implant | |
650 | 4 | |a printed anatomical model | |
653 | 0 | |a Medicine | |
653 | 0 | |a R | |
700 | 0 | |a Marina Barba |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Frédérique Chammartin |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Bilal Msallem |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Britt-Isabelle Berg |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Florian M. Thieringer |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Journal of Clinical Medicine |d MDPI AG, 2013 |g 10(2021), 16, p 3509 |w (DE-627)718632478 |w (DE-600)2662592-1 |x 20770383 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:10 |g year:2021 |g number:16, p 3509 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10163509 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doaj.org/article/71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3509 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_DOAJ | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 10 |j 2021 |e 16, p 3509 |
author_variant |
g r s grs m b mb f c fc b m bm b i b bib f m t fmt |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:20770383:2021----::ucinlncseiotoefercntutooioaeuiaeaobtllofatrslwufatrsihnwtoth |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2021 |
publishDate |
2021 |
allfields |
10.3390/jcm10163509 doi (DE-627)DOAJ049117610 (DE-599)DOAJ71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Guido R. Sigron verfasserin aut Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The present study aimed to analyze if a preformed “hybrid” patient-specific orbital mesh provides a more accurate reconstruction of the orbital floor and a better functional outcome than a standardized, intraoperatively adapted titanium implant. Thirty patients who had undergone surgical reconstruction for isolated, unilateral orbital floor fractures between May 2016 and November 2018 were included in this study. Of these patients, 13 were treated conventionally by intraoperative adjustment of a standardized titanium mesh based on assessing the fracture’s shape and extent. For the other 17 patients, an individual three-dimensional (3D) anatomical model of the orbit was fabricated with an in-house 3D-printer. This model was used as a template to create a so-called “hybrid” patient-specific titanium implant by preforming the titanium mesh before surgery. The functional and cosmetic outcome in terms of diplopia, enophthalmos, ocular motility, and sensory disturbance trended better when “hybrid” patient-specific titanium meshes were used but with statistically non-significant differences. The 3D-printed anatomical models mirroring the unaffected orbit did not delay the surgery’s timepoint. Nonetheless, it significantly reduced the surgery duration compared to the traditional method (58.9 (SD: 20.1) min versus 94.8 (SD: 33.0) min, <i<p</i<-value = 0.003). This study shows that using 3D-printed anatomical models as a supporting tool allows precise and less time-consuming orbital reconstructions with clinical benefits. orbital fracture blow-out fracture orbital reconstruction functional outcome patient-specific implant printed anatomical model Medicine R Marina Barba verfasserin aut Frédérique Chammartin verfasserin aut Bilal Msallem verfasserin aut Britt-Isabelle Berg verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Journal of Clinical Medicine MDPI AG, 2013 10(2021), 16, p 3509 (DE-627)718632478 (DE-600)2662592-1 20770383 nnns volume:10 year:2021 number:16, p 3509 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10163509 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3509 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2021 16, p 3509 |
spelling |
10.3390/jcm10163509 doi (DE-627)DOAJ049117610 (DE-599)DOAJ71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Guido R. Sigron verfasserin aut Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The present study aimed to analyze if a preformed “hybrid” patient-specific orbital mesh provides a more accurate reconstruction of the orbital floor and a better functional outcome than a standardized, intraoperatively adapted titanium implant. Thirty patients who had undergone surgical reconstruction for isolated, unilateral orbital floor fractures between May 2016 and November 2018 were included in this study. Of these patients, 13 were treated conventionally by intraoperative adjustment of a standardized titanium mesh based on assessing the fracture’s shape and extent. For the other 17 patients, an individual three-dimensional (3D) anatomical model of the orbit was fabricated with an in-house 3D-printer. This model was used as a template to create a so-called “hybrid” patient-specific titanium implant by preforming the titanium mesh before surgery. The functional and cosmetic outcome in terms of diplopia, enophthalmos, ocular motility, and sensory disturbance trended better when “hybrid” patient-specific titanium meshes were used but with statistically non-significant differences. The 3D-printed anatomical models mirroring the unaffected orbit did not delay the surgery’s timepoint. Nonetheless, it significantly reduced the surgery duration compared to the traditional method (58.9 (SD: 20.1) min versus 94.8 (SD: 33.0) min, <i<p</i<-value = 0.003). This study shows that using 3D-printed anatomical models as a supporting tool allows precise and less time-consuming orbital reconstructions with clinical benefits. orbital fracture blow-out fracture orbital reconstruction functional outcome patient-specific implant printed anatomical model Medicine R Marina Barba verfasserin aut Frédérique Chammartin verfasserin aut Bilal Msallem verfasserin aut Britt-Isabelle Berg verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Journal of Clinical Medicine MDPI AG, 2013 10(2021), 16, p 3509 (DE-627)718632478 (DE-600)2662592-1 20770383 nnns volume:10 year:2021 number:16, p 3509 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10163509 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3509 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2021 16, p 3509 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.3390/jcm10163509 doi (DE-627)DOAJ049117610 (DE-599)DOAJ71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Guido R. Sigron verfasserin aut Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The present study aimed to analyze if a preformed “hybrid” patient-specific orbital mesh provides a more accurate reconstruction of the orbital floor and a better functional outcome than a standardized, intraoperatively adapted titanium implant. Thirty patients who had undergone surgical reconstruction for isolated, unilateral orbital floor fractures between May 2016 and November 2018 were included in this study. Of these patients, 13 were treated conventionally by intraoperative adjustment of a standardized titanium mesh based on assessing the fracture’s shape and extent. For the other 17 patients, an individual three-dimensional (3D) anatomical model of the orbit was fabricated with an in-house 3D-printer. This model was used as a template to create a so-called “hybrid” patient-specific titanium implant by preforming the titanium mesh before surgery. The functional and cosmetic outcome in terms of diplopia, enophthalmos, ocular motility, and sensory disturbance trended better when “hybrid” patient-specific titanium meshes were used but with statistically non-significant differences. The 3D-printed anatomical models mirroring the unaffected orbit did not delay the surgery’s timepoint. Nonetheless, it significantly reduced the surgery duration compared to the traditional method (58.9 (SD: 20.1) min versus 94.8 (SD: 33.0) min, <i<p</i<-value = 0.003). This study shows that using 3D-printed anatomical models as a supporting tool allows precise and less time-consuming orbital reconstructions with clinical benefits. orbital fracture blow-out fracture orbital reconstruction functional outcome patient-specific implant printed anatomical model Medicine R Marina Barba verfasserin aut Frédérique Chammartin verfasserin aut Bilal Msallem verfasserin aut Britt-Isabelle Berg verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Journal of Clinical Medicine MDPI AG, 2013 10(2021), 16, p 3509 (DE-627)718632478 (DE-600)2662592-1 20770383 nnns volume:10 year:2021 number:16, p 3509 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10163509 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3509 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2021 16, p 3509 |
allfieldsGer |
10.3390/jcm10163509 doi (DE-627)DOAJ049117610 (DE-599)DOAJ71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Guido R. Sigron verfasserin aut Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The present study aimed to analyze if a preformed “hybrid” patient-specific orbital mesh provides a more accurate reconstruction of the orbital floor and a better functional outcome than a standardized, intraoperatively adapted titanium implant. Thirty patients who had undergone surgical reconstruction for isolated, unilateral orbital floor fractures between May 2016 and November 2018 were included in this study. Of these patients, 13 were treated conventionally by intraoperative adjustment of a standardized titanium mesh based on assessing the fracture’s shape and extent. For the other 17 patients, an individual three-dimensional (3D) anatomical model of the orbit was fabricated with an in-house 3D-printer. This model was used as a template to create a so-called “hybrid” patient-specific titanium implant by preforming the titanium mesh before surgery. The functional and cosmetic outcome in terms of diplopia, enophthalmos, ocular motility, and sensory disturbance trended better when “hybrid” patient-specific titanium meshes were used but with statistically non-significant differences. The 3D-printed anatomical models mirroring the unaffected orbit did not delay the surgery’s timepoint. Nonetheless, it significantly reduced the surgery duration compared to the traditional method (58.9 (SD: 20.1) min versus 94.8 (SD: 33.0) min, <i<p</i<-value = 0.003). This study shows that using 3D-printed anatomical models as a supporting tool allows precise and less time-consuming orbital reconstructions with clinical benefits. orbital fracture blow-out fracture orbital reconstruction functional outcome patient-specific implant printed anatomical model Medicine R Marina Barba verfasserin aut Frédérique Chammartin verfasserin aut Bilal Msallem verfasserin aut Britt-Isabelle Berg verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Journal of Clinical Medicine MDPI AG, 2013 10(2021), 16, p 3509 (DE-627)718632478 (DE-600)2662592-1 20770383 nnns volume:10 year:2021 number:16, p 3509 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10163509 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3509 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2021 16, p 3509 |
allfieldsSound |
10.3390/jcm10163509 doi (DE-627)DOAJ049117610 (DE-599)DOAJ71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Guido R. Sigron verfasserin aut Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The present study aimed to analyze if a preformed “hybrid” patient-specific orbital mesh provides a more accurate reconstruction of the orbital floor and a better functional outcome than a standardized, intraoperatively adapted titanium implant. Thirty patients who had undergone surgical reconstruction for isolated, unilateral orbital floor fractures between May 2016 and November 2018 were included in this study. Of these patients, 13 were treated conventionally by intraoperative adjustment of a standardized titanium mesh based on assessing the fracture’s shape and extent. For the other 17 patients, an individual three-dimensional (3D) anatomical model of the orbit was fabricated with an in-house 3D-printer. This model was used as a template to create a so-called “hybrid” patient-specific titanium implant by preforming the titanium mesh before surgery. The functional and cosmetic outcome in terms of diplopia, enophthalmos, ocular motility, and sensory disturbance trended better when “hybrid” patient-specific titanium meshes were used but with statistically non-significant differences. The 3D-printed anatomical models mirroring the unaffected orbit did not delay the surgery’s timepoint. Nonetheless, it significantly reduced the surgery duration compared to the traditional method (58.9 (SD: 20.1) min versus 94.8 (SD: 33.0) min, <i<p</i<-value = 0.003). This study shows that using 3D-printed anatomical models as a supporting tool allows precise and less time-consuming orbital reconstructions with clinical benefits. orbital fracture blow-out fracture orbital reconstruction functional outcome patient-specific implant printed anatomical model Medicine R Marina Barba verfasserin aut Frédérique Chammartin verfasserin aut Bilal Msallem verfasserin aut Britt-Isabelle Berg verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Journal of Clinical Medicine MDPI AG, 2013 10(2021), 16, p 3509 (DE-627)718632478 (DE-600)2662592-1 20770383 nnns volume:10 year:2021 number:16, p 3509 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10163509 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3509 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2021 16, p 3509 |
language |
English |
source |
In Journal of Clinical Medicine 10(2021), 16, p 3509 volume:10 year:2021 number:16, p 3509 |
sourceStr |
In Journal of Clinical Medicine 10(2021), 16, p 3509 volume:10 year:2021 number:16, p 3509 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
orbital fracture blow-out fracture orbital reconstruction functional outcome patient-specific implant printed anatomical model Medicine R |
isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
container_title |
Journal of Clinical Medicine |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Guido R. Sigron @@aut@@ Marina Barba @@aut@@ Frédérique Chammartin @@aut@@ Bilal Msallem @@aut@@ Britt-Isabelle Berg @@aut@@ Florian M. Thieringer @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2021-01-01T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
718632478 |
id |
DOAJ049117610 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ049117610</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240412163438.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3390/jcm10163509</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ049117610</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Guido R. Sigron</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The present study aimed to analyze if a preformed “hybrid” patient-specific orbital mesh provides a more accurate reconstruction of the orbital floor and a better functional outcome than a standardized, intraoperatively adapted titanium implant. Thirty patients who had undergone surgical reconstruction for isolated, unilateral orbital floor fractures between May 2016 and November 2018 were included in this study. Of these patients, 13 were treated conventionally by intraoperative adjustment of a standardized titanium mesh based on assessing the fracture’s shape and extent. For the other 17 patients, an individual three-dimensional (3D) anatomical model of the orbit was fabricated with an in-house 3D-printer. This model was used as a template to create a so-called “hybrid” patient-specific titanium implant by preforming the titanium mesh before surgery. The functional and cosmetic outcome in terms of diplopia, enophthalmos, ocular motility, and sensory disturbance trended better when “hybrid” patient-specific titanium meshes were used but with statistically non-significant differences. The 3D-printed anatomical models mirroring the unaffected orbit did not delay the surgery’s timepoint. Nonetheless, it significantly reduced the surgery duration compared to the traditional method (58.9 (SD: 20.1) min versus 94.8 (SD: 33.0) min, <i<p</i<-value = 0.003). This study shows that using 3D-printed anatomical models as a supporting tool allows precise and less time-consuming orbital reconstructions with clinical benefits.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">orbital fracture</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">blow-out fracture</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">orbital reconstruction</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">functional outcome</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">patient-specific implant</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">printed anatomical model</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medicine</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Marina Barba</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Frédérique Chammartin</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bilal Msallem</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Britt-Isabelle Berg</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Florian M. Thieringer</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of Clinical Medicine</subfield><subfield code="d">MDPI AG, 2013</subfield><subfield code="g">10(2021), 16, p 3509</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)718632478</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2662592-1</subfield><subfield code="x">20770383</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:10</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:16, p 3509</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10163509</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3509</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">10</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">16, p 3509</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Guido R. Sigron |
spellingShingle |
Guido R. Sigron misc orbital fracture misc blow-out fracture misc orbital reconstruction misc functional outcome misc patient-specific implant misc printed anatomical model misc Medicine misc R Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models |
authorStr |
Guido R. Sigron |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)718632478 |
format |
electronic Article |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut |
collection |
DOAJ |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
20770383 |
topic_title |
Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models orbital fracture blow-out fracture orbital reconstruction functional outcome patient-specific implant printed anatomical model |
topic |
misc orbital fracture misc blow-out fracture misc orbital reconstruction misc functional outcome misc patient-specific implant misc printed anatomical model misc Medicine misc R |
topic_unstemmed |
misc orbital fracture misc blow-out fracture misc orbital reconstruction misc functional outcome misc patient-specific implant misc printed anatomical model misc Medicine misc R |
topic_browse |
misc orbital fracture misc blow-out fracture misc orbital reconstruction misc functional outcome misc patient-specific implant misc printed anatomical model misc Medicine misc R |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Journal of Clinical Medicine |
hierarchy_parent_id |
718632478 |
hierarchy_top_title |
Journal of Clinical Medicine |
isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)718632478 (DE-600)2662592-1 |
title |
Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)DOAJ049117610 (DE-599)DOAJ71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 |
title_full |
Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models |
author_sort |
Guido R. Sigron |
journal |
Journal of Clinical Medicine |
journalStr |
Journal of Clinical Medicine |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
true |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2021 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
author_browse |
Guido R. Sigron Marina Barba Frédérique Chammartin Bilal Msallem Britt-Isabelle Berg Florian M. Thieringer |
container_volume |
10 |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Guido R. Sigron |
doi_str_mv |
10.3390/jcm10163509 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
functional and cosmetic outcome after reconstruction of isolated, unilateral orbital floor fractures (blow-out fractures) with and without the support of 3d-printed orbital anatomical models |
title_auth |
Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models |
abstract |
The present study aimed to analyze if a preformed “hybrid” patient-specific orbital mesh provides a more accurate reconstruction of the orbital floor and a better functional outcome than a standardized, intraoperatively adapted titanium implant. Thirty patients who had undergone surgical reconstruction for isolated, unilateral orbital floor fractures between May 2016 and November 2018 were included in this study. Of these patients, 13 were treated conventionally by intraoperative adjustment of a standardized titanium mesh based on assessing the fracture’s shape and extent. For the other 17 patients, an individual three-dimensional (3D) anatomical model of the orbit was fabricated with an in-house 3D-printer. This model was used as a template to create a so-called “hybrid” patient-specific titanium implant by preforming the titanium mesh before surgery. The functional and cosmetic outcome in terms of diplopia, enophthalmos, ocular motility, and sensory disturbance trended better when “hybrid” patient-specific titanium meshes were used but with statistically non-significant differences. The 3D-printed anatomical models mirroring the unaffected orbit did not delay the surgery’s timepoint. Nonetheless, it significantly reduced the surgery duration compared to the traditional method (58.9 (SD: 20.1) min versus 94.8 (SD: 33.0) min, <i<p</i<-value = 0.003). This study shows that using 3D-printed anatomical models as a supporting tool allows precise and less time-consuming orbital reconstructions with clinical benefits. |
abstractGer |
The present study aimed to analyze if a preformed “hybrid” patient-specific orbital mesh provides a more accurate reconstruction of the orbital floor and a better functional outcome than a standardized, intraoperatively adapted titanium implant. Thirty patients who had undergone surgical reconstruction for isolated, unilateral orbital floor fractures between May 2016 and November 2018 were included in this study. Of these patients, 13 were treated conventionally by intraoperative adjustment of a standardized titanium mesh based on assessing the fracture’s shape and extent. For the other 17 patients, an individual three-dimensional (3D) anatomical model of the orbit was fabricated with an in-house 3D-printer. This model was used as a template to create a so-called “hybrid” patient-specific titanium implant by preforming the titanium mesh before surgery. The functional and cosmetic outcome in terms of diplopia, enophthalmos, ocular motility, and sensory disturbance trended better when “hybrid” patient-specific titanium meshes were used but with statistically non-significant differences. The 3D-printed anatomical models mirroring the unaffected orbit did not delay the surgery’s timepoint. Nonetheless, it significantly reduced the surgery duration compared to the traditional method (58.9 (SD: 20.1) min versus 94.8 (SD: 33.0) min, <i<p</i<-value = 0.003). This study shows that using 3D-printed anatomical models as a supporting tool allows precise and less time-consuming orbital reconstructions with clinical benefits. |
abstract_unstemmed |
The present study aimed to analyze if a preformed “hybrid” patient-specific orbital mesh provides a more accurate reconstruction of the orbital floor and a better functional outcome than a standardized, intraoperatively adapted titanium implant. Thirty patients who had undergone surgical reconstruction for isolated, unilateral orbital floor fractures between May 2016 and November 2018 were included in this study. Of these patients, 13 were treated conventionally by intraoperative adjustment of a standardized titanium mesh based on assessing the fracture’s shape and extent. For the other 17 patients, an individual three-dimensional (3D) anatomical model of the orbit was fabricated with an in-house 3D-printer. This model was used as a template to create a so-called “hybrid” patient-specific titanium implant by preforming the titanium mesh before surgery. The functional and cosmetic outcome in terms of diplopia, enophthalmos, ocular motility, and sensory disturbance trended better when “hybrid” patient-specific titanium meshes were used but with statistically non-significant differences. The 3D-printed anatomical models mirroring the unaffected orbit did not delay the surgery’s timepoint. Nonetheless, it significantly reduced the surgery duration compared to the traditional method (58.9 (SD: 20.1) min versus 94.8 (SD: 33.0) min, <i<p</i<-value = 0.003). This study shows that using 3D-printed anatomical models as a supporting tool allows precise and less time-consuming orbital reconstructions with clinical benefits. |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
container_issue |
16, p 3509 |
title_short |
Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models |
url |
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10163509 https://doaj.org/article/71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451 https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3509 https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Marina Barba Frédérique Chammartin Bilal Msallem Britt-Isabelle Berg Florian M. Thieringer |
author2Str |
Marina Barba Frédérique Chammartin Bilal Msallem Britt-Isabelle Berg Florian M. Thieringer |
ppnlink |
718632478 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
true |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.3390/jcm10163509 |
up_date |
2024-07-03T21:32:07.959Z |
_version_ |
1803595104086130688 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ049117610</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240412163438.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3390/jcm10163509</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ049117610</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Guido R. Sigron</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Functional and Cosmetic Outcome after Reconstruction of Isolated, Unilateral Orbital Floor Fractures (Blow-Out Fractures) with and without the Support of 3D-Printed Orbital Anatomical Models</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The present study aimed to analyze if a preformed “hybrid” patient-specific orbital mesh provides a more accurate reconstruction of the orbital floor and a better functional outcome than a standardized, intraoperatively adapted titanium implant. Thirty patients who had undergone surgical reconstruction for isolated, unilateral orbital floor fractures between May 2016 and November 2018 were included in this study. Of these patients, 13 were treated conventionally by intraoperative adjustment of a standardized titanium mesh based on assessing the fracture’s shape and extent. For the other 17 patients, an individual three-dimensional (3D) anatomical model of the orbit was fabricated with an in-house 3D-printer. This model was used as a template to create a so-called “hybrid” patient-specific titanium implant by preforming the titanium mesh before surgery. The functional and cosmetic outcome in terms of diplopia, enophthalmos, ocular motility, and sensory disturbance trended better when “hybrid” patient-specific titanium meshes were used but with statistically non-significant differences. The 3D-printed anatomical models mirroring the unaffected orbit did not delay the surgery’s timepoint. Nonetheless, it significantly reduced the surgery duration compared to the traditional method (58.9 (SD: 20.1) min versus 94.8 (SD: 33.0) min, <i<p</i<-value = 0.003). This study shows that using 3D-printed anatomical models as a supporting tool allows precise and less time-consuming orbital reconstructions with clinical benefits.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">orbital fracture</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">blow-out fracture</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">orbital reconstruction</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">functional outcome</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">patient-specific implant</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">printed anatomical model</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medicine</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Marina Barba</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Frédérique Chammartin</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bilal Msallem</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Britt-Isabelle Berg</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Florian M. Thieringer</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of Clinical Medicine</subfield><subfield code="d">MDPI AG, 2013</subfield><subfield code="g">10(2021), 16, p 3509</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)718632478</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2662592-1</subfield><subfield code="x">20770383</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:10</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:16, p 3509</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10163509</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/71bd1756e46747b1a1d1e5cd7e82c451</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3509</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">10</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">16, p 3509</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.399906 |