ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Biocompatible Materials for Orbital Wall Reconstruction-An Overview.
Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Autologous bone grafts versus alloplastic implants for orbital floor reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Double-sheeted silicone plate reconstruction for inferomedial orbital wall fractures: a retrospective single-center case series with a historical reference cohort.Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology · 2026Article
- From Autologous Bone Tissue to Bioengineered Material Solutions in Post-Traumatic Orbital Wall Reconstruction: An Overview.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Review
- Post-Traumatic Orbital Reconstruction Using Titanium Patient-Specific Implants: A Clinical and Radiological Cohort Study Focusing on Paranasal Sinuses Physiology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Periocular Reconstruction in Facial Trauma: Surgical Approaches and Multidisciplinary Perspectives.Cureus · 2025Review
- Uniform and controllable surface nano-structure on polyetheretherketone implants can regulate mechanical property to enhance soft tissue integration through Piezo1/TGF-β1 signaling axis.Materials today. Bio · 2025Article
- A New Approach for Orbital Wall Reconstruction in a Rabbit Animal Model Using a Hybrid Hydroxyapatite-Collagen-Based Implant.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Titanium Implants Coated with Hydroxyapatite Used in Orbital Wall Reconstruction-A Literature Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Radiopacity Enhancements in Polymeric Implant Biomaterials: A Comprehensive Literature Review.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2024Review
- How to Enhance Dental Implant Therapies and Definitive Restoration Outcomes to Reduce Complications and Improve Patient Well-Being.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Application of 3D printed pelvic fracture related urethra and surrounding tissue as preoperative planning model.BMC urology · 2023Article
- Virtual Planning and 3D Printing in the Management of Acute Orbital Fractures and Post-Traumatic Deformities.Seminars in plastic surgery · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.