Clinical and Histopathologic Review of 18 Explanted Porous Polyethylene Orbital Implants

Purpose To review the clinical and histopathologic features of porous polyethylene (PP) orbital implants requiring explantation. Design Case series. Participants Eighteen explanted PP orbital implants of 18 patients were studied. Methods The charts and histopathologic findings were reviewed for all...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.) Minn.), 2009-02, Vol.116 (2), p.349-354
Hauptverfasser: Chuo, Jean Y., MD, Dolman, Peter J., MD, FRCSC, Ng, Tony L., MD, Buffam, Frank V., MD, FRCSC, White, Valerie A., MD, FRCPC
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 354
container_issue 2
container_start_page 349
container_title Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.)
container_volume 116
creator Chuo, Jean Y., MD
Dolman, Peter J., MD, FRCSC
Ng, Tony L., MD
Buffam, Frank V., MD, FRCSC
White, Valerie A., MD, FRCPC
description Purpose To review the clinical and histopathologic features of porous polyethylene (PP) orbital implants requiring explantation. Design Case series. Participants Eighteen explanted PP orbital implants of 18 patients were studied. Methods The charts and histopathologic findings were reviewed for all patients requiring explantation of PP orbital implants between 1997 and 2006 by 2 oculoplastic surgeons at the University of British Columbia. Main Outcome Measures Clinical data obtained included patient demographics, the nature of the primary surgery, and the clinical presentation leading to eventual implant removal. The histopathologic data observed included the presence of anterior exposure, area of fibrovascular ingrowth, type of inflammation, and presence and type of bacterial colonies. Results Nine (50%) of the 18 patients studied were referred from other surgeons. The balance represented 3.2% of all PP implants placed by the 2 surgeons. The procedures for the primary surgery were 12 enucleations (67%), 5 eviscerations (28%), and 1 secondary implant (5%). Clinical findings included anterior implant exposure and discharge in all cases. Histopathologic analysis was performed in all of the implants and showed less than 50% fibrovascular ingrowth in 16 implants (89%) and predominantly acute or mixed inflammation in 15 (83%). Foreign body giant cells were seen adjacent to the implant material in all cases. Bacterial colonies on gram stain were identified in 12 specimens (67%); overall, gram-positive cocci in clusters or chains were found in 10 implants (56%), and gram-negative bacteria were found in 1 (5.5%). Thirteen patients (72%) lived in locations distant from Vancouver, the surgical center. Conclusions This article presents the largest review of explanted porous polyethylene orbital spheres. The findings suggest that anterior exposure allows bacterial colonization and the development of a heavy inflammatory infiltrate. Poor tissue ingrowth may limit the penetration of topical or systemic antibiotic therapy, leading to the necessity for explantation. Financial Disclosure(s) The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.09.022
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66886739</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S016164200800941X</els_id><sourcerecordid>66886739</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-b552f60f93555ee50cfaebd365f89565ccca35c1228efd57985ada1bc69b1c43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkcFu1DAURS1ERYfCHyCUDewSnh3bE2-Q0Ki0lSq1arvoznKcZ8ZDJg52pjB_Xw8TgcSG1ducd3V1LiHvKFQUqPy0qcK4ntamYgBNBaoCxl6QBRVclXxJ65dkkTFaSs7glLxOaQMAUtb8FTmlChTllC3I46r3g7emL8zQFZc-TWE00zr04Zu3xR0-efxZBFfQpjj_NfZmmLArbkMMu5RPv8dpve9xwOImtn7KMVfb31R6Q06c6RO-ne8Zefh6_rC6LK9vLq5WX65Ly7mYylYI5iQ4VQshEAVYZ7Dtailco4QU1lpTC0sZa9B1YqkaYTpDWytVSy2vz8jHY-wYw48dpklvfbLY5w6YO2opm0Yua5VBfgRtDClFdHqMfmviXlPQB6F6o49C9UGoBqWz0Pz2fs7ftVvs_j7NBjPwYQZMyhpdNIP16Q_HKKgliDpzn48cZhnZatTJehwsdj6inXQX_P-a_Btg5-m-4x7TJuzikEVrqhPToO8P4x-2hwZAcfpYPwOZBKuB</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>66886739</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Clinical and Histopathologic Review of 18 Explanted Porous Polyethylene Orbital Implants</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Chuo, Jean Y., MD ; Dolman, Peter J., MD, FRCSC ; Ng, Tony L., MD ; Buffam, Frank V., MD, FRCSC ; White, Valerie A., MD, FRCPC</creator><creatorcontrib>Chuo, Jean Y., MD ; Dolman, Peter J., MD, FRCSC ; Ng, Tony L., MD ; Buffam, Frank V., MD, FRCSC ; White, Valerie A., MD, FRCPC</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose To review the clinical and histopathologic features of porous polyethylene (PP) orbital implants requiring explantation. Design Case series. Participants Eighteen explanted PP orbital implants of 18 patients were studied. Methods The charts and histopathologic findings were reviewed for all patients requiring explantation of PP orbital implants between 1997 and 2006 by 2 oculoplastic surgeons at the University of British Columbia. Main Outcome Measures Clinical data obtained included patient demographics, the nature of the primary surgery, and the clinical presentation leading to eventual implant removal. The histopathologic data observed included the presence of anterior exposure, area of fibrovascular ingrowth, type of inflammation, and presence and type of bacterial colonies. Results Nine (50%) of the 18 patients studied were referred from other surgeons. The balance represented 3.2% of all PP implants placed by the 2 surgeons. The procedures for the primary surgery were 12 enucleations (67%), 5 eviscerations (28%), and 1 secondary implant (5%). Clinical findings included anterior implant exposure and discharge in all cases. Histopathologic analysis was performed in all of the implants and showed less than 50% fibrovascular ingrowth in 16 implants (89%) and predominantly acute or mixed inflammation in 15 (83%). Foreign body giant cells were seen adjacent to the implant material in all cases. Bacterial colonies on gram stain were identified in 12 specimens (67%); overall, gram-positive cocci in clusters or chains were found in 10 implants (56%), and gram-negative bacteria were found in 1 (5.5%). Thirteen patients (72%) lived in locations distant from Vancouver, the surgical center. Conclusions This article presents the largest review of explanted porous polyethylene orbital spheres. The findings suggest that anterior exposure allows bacterial colonization and the development of a heavy inflammatory infiltrate. Poor tissue ingrowth may limit the penetration of topical or systemic antibiotic therapy, leading to the necessity for explantation. Financial Disclosure(s) The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0161-6420</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1549-4713</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.09.022</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19091412</identifier><identifier>CODEN: OPHTDG</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Biological and medical sciences ; Coated Materials, Biocompatible ; Device Removal ; Eye Enucleation ; Eye Evisceration ; Eye Infections, Bacterial - etiology ; Eye Infections, Bacterial - pathology ; Eye, Artificial ; Female ; Fibrosis - pathology ; Foreign-Body Reaction - etiology ; Foreign-Body Reaction - pathology ; Giant Cells, Foreign-Body - pathology ; Humans ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Miscellaneous ; Ophthalmology ; Orbit - surgery ; Orbital Implants - adverse effects ; Polyethylene ; Porosity ; Prosthesis Implantation ; Prosthesis-Related Infections - etiology ; Prosthesis-Related Infections - pathology</subject><ispartof>Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.), 2009-02, Vol.116 (2), p.349-354</ispartof><rights>American Academy of Ophthalmology</rights><rights>2009 American Academy of Ophthalmology</rights><rights>2009 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-b552f60f93555ee50cfaebd365f89565ccca35c1228efd57985ada1bc69b1c43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-b552f60f93555ee50cfaebd365f89565ccca35c1228efd57985ada1bc69b1c43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016164200800941X$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3536,27903,27904,65309</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=21097053$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19091412$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chuo, Jean Y., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dolman, Peter J., MD, FRCSC</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ng, Tony L., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buffam, Frank V., MD, FRCSC</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>White, Valerie A., MD, FRCPC</creatorcontrib><title>Clinical and Histopathologic Review of 18 Explanted Porous Polyethylene Orbital Implants</title><title>Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.)</title><addtitle>Ophthalmology</addtitle><description>Purpose To review the clinical and histopathologic features of porous polyethylene (PP) orbital implants requiring explantation. Design Case series. Participants Eighteen explanted PP orbital implants of 18 patients were studied. Methods The charts and histopathologic findings were reviewed for all patients requiring explantation of PP orbital implants between 1997 and 2006 by 2 oculoplastic surgeons at the University of British Columbia. Main Outcome Measures Clinical data obtained included patient demographics, the nature of the primary surgery, and the clinical presentation leading to eventual implant removal. The histopathologic data observed included the presence of anterior exposure, area of fibrovascular ingrowth, type of inflammation, and presence and type of bacterial colonies. Results Nine (50%) of the 18 patients studied were referred from other surgeons. The balance represented 3.2% of all PP implants placed by the 2 surgeons. The procedures for the primary surgery were 12 enucleations (67%), 5 eviscerations (28%), and 1 secondary implant (5%). Clinical findings included anterior implant exposure and discharge in all cases. Histopathologic analysis was performed in all of the implants and showed less than 50% fibrovascular ingrowth in 16 implants (89%) and predominantly acute or mixed inflammation in 15 (83%). Foreign body giant cells were seen adjacent to the implant material in all cases. Bacterial colonies on gram stain were identified in 12 specimens (67%); overall, gram-positive cocci in clusters or chains were found in 10 implants (56%), and gram-negative bacteria were found in 1 (5.5%). Thirteen patients (72%) lived in locations distant from Vancouver, the surgical center. Conclusions This article presents the largest review of explanted porous polyethylene orbital spheres. The findings suggest that anterior exposure allows bacterial colonization and the development of a heavy inflammatory infiltrate. Poor tissue ingrowth may limit the penetration of topical or systemic antibiotic therapy, leading to the necessity for explantation. Financial Disclosure(s) The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Coated Materials, Biocompatible</subject><subject>Device Removal</subject><subject>Eye Enucleation</subject><subject>Eye Evisceration</subject><subject>Eye Infections, Bacterial - etiology</subject><subject>Eye Infections, Bacterial - pathology</subject><subject>Eye, Artificial</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fibrosis - pathology</subject><subject>Foreign-Body Reaction - etiology</subject><subject>Foreign-Body Reaction - pathology</subject><subject>Giant Cells, Foreign-Body - pathology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Ophthalmology</subject><subject>Orbit - surgery</subject><subject>Orbital Implants - adverse effects</subject><subject>Polyethylene</subject><subject>Porosity</subject><subject>Prosthesis Implantation</subject><subject>Prosthesis-Related Infections - etiology</subject><subject>Prosthesis-Related Infections - pathology</subject><issn>0161-6420</issn><issn>1549-4713</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkcFu1DAURS1ERYfCHyCUDewSnh3bE2-Q0Ki0lSq1arvoznKcZ8ZDJg52pjB_Xw8TgcSG1ducd3V1LiHvKFQUqPy0qcK4ntamYgBNBaoCxl6QBRVclXxJ65dkkTFaSs7glLxOaQMAUtb8FTmlChTllC3I46r3g7emL8zQFZc-TWE00zr04Zu3xR0-efxZBFfQpjj_NfZmmLArbkMMu5RPv8dpve9xwOImtn7KMVfb31R6Q06c6RO-ne8Zefh6_rC6LK9vLq5WX65Ly7mYylYI5iQ4VQshEAVYZ7Dtailco4QU1lpTC0sZa9B1YqkaYTpDWytVSy2vz8jHY-wYw48dpklvfbLY5w6YO2opm0Yua5VBfgRtDClFdHqMfmviXlPQB6F6o49C9UGoBqWz0Pz2fs7ftVvs_j7NBjPwYQZMyhpdNIP16Q_HKKgliDpzn48cZhnZatTJehwsdj6inXQX_P-a_Btg5-m-4x7TJuzikEVrqhPToO8P4x-2hwZAcfpYPwOZBKuB</recordid><startdate>20090201</startdate><enddate>20090201</enddate><creator>Chuo, Jean Y., MD</creator><creator>Dolman, Peter J., MD, FRCSC</creator><creator>Ng, Tony L., MD</creator><creator>Buffam, Frank V., MD, FRCSC</creator><creator>White, Valerie A., MD, FRCPC</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090201</creationdate><title>Clinical and Histopathologic Review of 18 Explanted Porous Polyethylene Orbital Implants</title><author>Chuo, Jean Y., MD ; Dolman, Peter J., MD, FRCSC ; Ng, Tony L., MD ; Buffam, Frank V., MD, FRCSC ; White, Valerie A., MD, FRCPC</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-b552f60f93555ee50cfaebd365f89565ccca35c1228efd57985ada1bc69b1c43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Coated Materials, Biocompatible</topic><topic>Device Removal</topic><topic>Eye Enucleation</topic><topic>Eye Evisceration</topic><topic>Eye Infections, Bacterial - etiology</topic><topic>Eye Infections, Bacterial - pathology</topic><topic>Eye, Artificial</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fibrosis - pathology</topic><topic>Foreign-Body Reaction - etiology</topic><topic>Foreign-Body Reaction - pathology</topic><topic>Giant Cells, Foreign-Body - pathology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Ophthalmology</topic><topic>Orbit - surgery</topic><topic>Orbital Implants - adverse effects</topic><topic>Polyethylene</topic><topic>Porosity</topic><topic>Prosthesis Implantation</topic><topic>Prosthesis-Related Infections - etiology</topic><topic>Prosthesis-Related Infections - pathology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chuo, Jean Y., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dolman, Peter J., MD, FRCSC</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ng, Tony L., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buffam, Frank V., MD, FRCSC</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>White, Valerie A., MD, FRCPC</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chuo, Jean Y., MD</au><au>Dolman, Peter J., MD, FRCSC</au><au>Ng, Tony L., MD</au><au>Buffam, Frank V., MD, FRCSC</au><au>White, Valerie A., MD, FRCPC</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Clinical and Histopathologic Review of 18 Explanted Porous Polyethylene Orbital Implants</atitle><jtitle>Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.)</jtitle><addtitle>Ophthalmology</addtitle><date>2009-02-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>116</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>349</spage><epage>354</epage><pages>349-354</pages><issn>0161-6420</issn><eissn>1549-4713</eissn><coden>OPHTDG</coden><abstract>Purpose To review the clinical and histopathologic features of porous polyethylene (PP) orbital implants requiring explantation. Design Case series. Participants Eighteen explanted PP orbital implants of 18 patients were studied. Methods The charts and histopathologic findings were reviewed for all patients requiring explantation of PP orbital implants between 1997 and 2006 by 2 oculoplastic surgeons at the University of British Columbia. Main Outcome Measures Clinical data obtained included patient demographics, the nature of the primary surgery, and the clinical presentation leading to eventual implant removal. The histopathologic data observed included the presence of anterior exposure, area of fibrovascular ingrowth, type of inflammation, and presence and type of bacterial colonies. Results Nine (50%) of the 18 patients studied were referred from other surgeons. The balance represented 3.2% of all PP implants placed by the 2 surgeons. The procedures for the primary surgery were 12 enucleations (67%), 5 eviscerations (28%), and 1 secondary implant (5%). Clinical findings included anterior implant exposure and discharge in all cases. Histopathologic analysis was performed in all of the implants and showed less than 50% fibrovascular ingrowth in 16 implants (89%) and predominantly acute or mixed inflammation in 15 (83%). Foreign body giant cells were seen adjacent to the implant material in all cases. Bacterial colonies on gram stain were identified in 12 specimens (67%); overall, gram-positive cocci in clusters or chains were found in 10 implants (56%), and gram-negative bacteria were found in 1 (5.5%). Thirteen patients (72%) lived in locations distant from Vancouver, the surgical center. Conclusions This article presents the largest review of explanted porous polyethylene orbital spheres. The findings suggest that anterior exposure allows bacterial colonization and the development of a heavy inflammatory infiltrate. Poor tissue ingrowth may limit the penetration of topical or systemic antibiotic therapy, leading to the necessity for explantation. Financial Disclosure(s) The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>19091412</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.09.022</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0161-6420
ispartof Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.), 2009-02, Vol.116 (2), p.349-354
issn 0161-6420
1549-4713
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66886739
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Biological and medical sciences
Coated Materials, Biocompatible
Device Removal
Eye Enucleation
Eye Evisceration
Eye Infections, Bacterial - etiology
Eye Infections, Bacterial - pathology
Eye, Artificial
Female
Fibrosis - pathology
Foreign-Body Reaction - etiology
Foreign-Body Reaction - pathology
Giant Cells, Foreign-Body - pathology
Humans
Male
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Miscellaneous
Ophthalmology
Orbit - surgery
Orbital Implants - adverse effects
Polyethylene
Porosity
Prosthesis Implantation
Prosthesis-Related Infections - etiology
Prosthesis-Related Infections - pathology
title Clinical and Histopathologic Review of 18 Explanted Porous Polyethylene Orbital Implants
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T05%3A09%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Clinical%20and%20Histopathologic%20Review%20of%2018%20Explanted%20Porous%20Polyethylene%20Orbital%20Implants&rft.jtitle=Ophthalmology%20(Rochester,%20Minn.)&rft.au=Chuo,%20Jean%20Y.,%20MD&rft.date=2009-02-01&rft.volume=116&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=349&rft.epage=354&rft.pages=349-354&rft.issn=0161-6420&rft.eissn=1549-4713&rft.coden=OPHTDG&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.09.022&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E66886739%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=66886739&rft_id=info:pmid/19091412&rft_els_id=S016164200800941X&rfr_iscdi=true