Observational studyInternational ophthalmology2024
Clinical outcomes and complications of a new high-density polyethylene-based spherical integrated porous orbital implant.
Observational study in International ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeTo describe our experience over 6 years using a new high-density polyethylene-based spherical integrated porous orbital implants (Oculfit).
methodsThis is an observational retrospective case series study analyzing all cases requiring Oculfit implants between February 2015 and September 2021. Clinical information regarding the population included, the characteristics of the implant, and the outcomes and complications during the follow-up were noted. The success of the implant was defined according to anatomical and functional parameters.
resultsThe study analyzed 90 cases of anophthalmic patients. The main causes for enucleation or evisceration were ocular decompensations (36.7%) and neoplasms (27.8% uveal melanoma and 7.8% retinoblastoma). Anatomical success was identified in 63 (70.0%) cases, functional success in 79 (87.8%) and complete success (anatomical + functional) in 61 (67.7%) cases. Factors associated with the functional success were age and exposure of the primary orbital implant. Complications appeared in 11 (12.2%) cases, which were completely resolved without sequelae in 4 (4.4%). Orbital explant was required in 5 (5.6%) cases.
conclusionIn our experience, Oculfit can be considered a useful alternative among the currently available options for orbital implants and has a good efficacy/safety profile.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39240285What 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.