Morphological evaluation of orbital implants in postenucleation reconstruction (an experimental study)

Gushchina M.B.

Central Research Institute of Dentistry and Maxillofacial Surgery;
Fyodorov Intersectoral Scientific and Technical Complex “Eye Microsurgery”

Tereshchenko A.V.

Kaluga branch of S.N. Fyodorov National Medical Research Center «MNTK «Eye Microsurgery»

Yuzhakova N.S.

Russian State Social University

Gavrilova N.A.

A.I. Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry

Trifanenkova I.G.

Kaluga branch of S.N. Fyodorov National Medical Research Center «MNTK «Eye Microsurgery»

Plakhotniy M.A.

Kaluga branch of S.N. Fedorov National Medical Research Center «MNTK «Eye Microsurgery»

Morphological evaluation of orbital implants in postenucleation reconstruction (an experimental study)

Authors:

Gushchina M.B., Tereshchenko A.V., Yuzhakova N.S., Gavrilova N.A., Trifanenkova I.G., Plakhotniy M.A.

More about the authors

Journal: Russian Annals of Ophthalmology. 2022;138(6): 70‑80

DOI: 10.17116/oftalma202213806170

Downloaded: 27

Download PDF (RU)

Contact the author

Table of contents

To cite this article:

Gushchina MB, Tereshchenko AV, Yuzhakova NS, Gavrilova NA, Trifanenkova IG, Plakhotniy MA. Morphological evaluation of orbital implants in postenucleation reconstruction (an experimental study). Russian Annals of Ophthalmology. 2022;138(6):70‑80. (In Russ.)
https://doi.org/10.17116/oftalma202213806170

Подписка 2025 (Russian Annals of Ophthalmology)

Close metadata

About 12 thousand surgeries for eyeball removal are performed every year in the Russian Federation. Formation of the supporting stump and implantation of the proper orbital implant is essential for successful cosmetic prosthesis.

PURPOSE

Comparison of materials biocompatibility, design of different orbital implants and morphological condition of formed postenucleation stumps in an in vivo experiment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In the course of the study 24 rabbits were operated, divided into three comparable groups. Enucleation with primary implantation of an orbital implant was performed in all subjects. The following implants were used: polymeric orbital implant — in the main (experimental) group, polytetrafluorethylene insertion implant — in the control group 1, and silicone endoprosthesis — in the control group 2. We assessed features of the implantation process, implant design, general condition of the operated animals, condition of the postenucleation stumps, passive motility of the stumps, and reaction of the surrounding tissues to the implants.

RESULTS

Performed surgeries did not negatively affect the general condition of the rabbits, and there was no significant local tissue reaction to the implants. The structural and design features of the implants used in the main group were found to be more convenient for implantation, ensured stable fixation and position in the orbit. Postenucleation stump motility was comparable in all groups during the early postoperative period. This parameter decreased at later follow-up times mostly in the control group 2. When extracting the implants, it was revealed that in the main group it had secure fixation to the orbital tissues and stable position, did not cause abundant proliferation of connective tissue. Pathomorphological examination revealed that tissue reaction to the implants was less prominent and was reversed soon with fine connective tissue capsule formation in the main group and control group 2. In the control group 1 tissue reaction increased progressively, and capsule formation was delayed.

CONCLUSION

Polymeric implant is the most suitable orbital implant for postenucleation orbital reconstruction.

Keywords:

enucleation in rabbits

postenucleation stump formation in rabbits

orbital implant

postenucleation stump

supporting stump

biocompatibility of orbital tissues

Authors:

Gushchina M.B.

Central Research Institute of Dentistry and Maxillofacial Surgery;
Fyodorov Intersectoral Scientific and Technical Complex “Eye Microsurgery”

Tereshchenko A.V.

Kaluga branch of S.N. Fyodorov National Medical Research Center «MNTK «Eye Microsurgery»

Yuzhakova N.S.

Russian State Social University

Gavrilova N.A.

A.I. Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry

Trifanenkova I.G.

Kaluga branch of S.N. Fyodorov National Medical Research Center «MNTK «Eye Microsurgery»

Plakhotniy M.A.

Kaluga branch of S.N. Fedorov National Medical Research Center «MNTK «Eye Microsurgery»

Received:

19.02.2021

Accepted:

20.04.2021

List of references:

Gundorova RA, Neroev VV, Kashnikov VV. Travmy glaza [Eye injury]. M.: GEOTAR-Media; 2009. (In Russ.).
Filatova IA. Anoftal’m. Patologiya i lechenie [Anophthalmos. Pathology and treatment]. M.: MNTs; 2007. (In Russ.).
Shif L.V. Udalenie glaza i voprosy kosmetiki [Eye removal and cosmetic issues]. M.: Meditsina; 1973. (In Russ.).
Kallakhan A. Surgery of the Eye Diseases [Surgery for eye diseases]. Moscow: Gos. izd. med. literatury; 1963. (In Russ.).
Filatova IA, Verigo EN, Prjakhina IA, Sadovskaya EP. The role of anatomic and clinical manifestations of trauma in choosing a method of removal of the eye. Rossiiskii oftal’mologicheskii zhurnal. 2014;7(4):52-59. (In Russ.).
Gushchina MB, Yuzhakova NS, Gavrilova NA, Kondratenko TS. Eye removal surgical techniques. Klinicheskaya oftal’mologiya. 2020;20(1):37-44. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.32364/2311-7729-2020-20-1-37-48
Astakhov YuS, Nikolaenko VP, D’yakov VE. Ispol’zovanie politetraftoretilenovykh implantatov v oftal’mokhirurgii [Use of polytetrafluoroethylene implants in ophthalmic surgery]. SPb.: Foliant; 2007. (In Russ.).
Gushchina MB, Treushnikov VM, Treushnikov VV. Endoprosthetics after enucleation using a polymeric orbital implant «BIONIK». In: Yeroshevskiye chteniya: Trudy Vserossiyskoy konferentsii [Eroshev Readings: Proceedings of the All-Russian Conference]. Eds Kotel’nikov G.P., Gridasov G.N., Malov V.M. Samara. 2012;425-428. (In Russ.).
Gushchina MB, Gavrilova NA, Yuzhakova NS. Sposob prizhiznennoi enukleatsii glaza krolika. Patent RF na izobretenie №2662415/25.07.2018 Byul. №21. Accessed 07.10.20. (In Russ.). https://patents.s3.yandex.net/RU2662415C1_20180725.pdf
Gushchina MB, Gavrilova NA, Yuzhakova NS. Sposob formirovaniya oporno-dvigatel’noi kul’ti posle enukleatsii u krolika. Patent RF na izobretenie №2662422/25.07.2018. Byul. №21. Accessed 07.10.20. (In Russ.). https://patents.s3.yandex.net/RU2662422C1_20180725.pdf
Gushchina MB, Treushnikov VV. Implantat orbital’nyi. Patent RF na izobretenie №2504348/20.01.2014 Byul. №2. Accessed 07.10.20. (In Russ.). https://patents.s3.yandex.net/RU2504348C2_20140120.pdf
D’yakov VE, Astakhov YuS, Nikolaenko VP, Kortunov YuA, Fedotova LM. Orbital’nyi implantat iz poristogo politetraftoretilena. Patent RF na izobretenie №2270641/27.02.2006 Byul. №6. Accessed 07.10.20. (In Russ.). https://patents.s3.yandex.net/RU2270641C1_20060227.pdf
Davis FA. The Anatomy and Histology of the Eye and Orbit of the Rabbit. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1929;27:400-418. Accessed 07.10.20. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1316745/?page=1
Biosovmestimye materialy [Biocompatible materials]. Eds VI Sevast’yanov, MP Kirpichnikov. M.: Izdatel’stvo MIA; 2011. (In Russ.).

Close metadata