↓ Skip to main content

Orbital floor fractures – short- and intermediate-term complications depending on treatment procedures

Overview of attention for article published in Head & Face Medicine, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Orbital floor fractures – short- and intermediate-term complications depending on treatment procedures
Published in
Head & Face Medicine, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13005-015-0096-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Henrik Holtmann, Hatice Eren, Karoline Sander, Norbert R. Kübler, Jörg Handschel

Abstract

Many reconstruction materials for orbital floor fractures have been described in the past including autologous bone transplants, resorbable polymers and titan meshes. So far evidence is missing which material is used successfully regarding indication and particular size of defect. Therefore the aim of this study was to evaluate which reconstruction technique produces best clinical outcome and least complications associated with indication. Retrospectively, surgical and ophthalmological data plus CT scans from a collective of 775 patients between 2005 and 2012 were analyzed. Furthermore included patients were sounded on satisfaction and potential problems postoperatively. Overall 593 patients offered full pre- and postoperative short-time data appropriate to inclusion criteria - of these 507 (85,5 %) underwent primary surgical treatment. Smallest average defect size was found in cases with no indication for surgical treatment (81 mm(2)), largest in cases indicating titanium mesh reconstruction (601.5 mm(2)). In 15 cases exact fragment reposition was possible without insertion of alloplastic material. Best clinical results obtained reconstruction using polydioxanone foil (PDS). 0.15 mm PDS-foil: 444 patients, reduced diplopia pre to postoperative 16 to 6 % (p < 0.01), ex- and enophthalmus < 2 % after surgery. 0.25 mm PDS-foil: 26 patients, reduced diplopia from pre- to postoperative 34,6 to 3,8 % (p < 0.01), postoperative exophthalmus rate was higher than preoperative (3,8 to 7,7 %). In comparison to reconstruction with PDS-foil a higher percentage of patients reconstructed with titanium meshes (n = 22) revealed no significant reduction of diplopia (45,5 to 31,8 %; p = 0.07). Furthermore 63 of all included patients agreed to complete a questionnaire on intermediate-term postoperative symptoms and surgical contentedness. Remarkably 50 % of the patients reconstructed with titanium meshes indicated foreign body sensations and cold feeling in the long-term. Short- and intermediate-term results of clinical outcome in our patients with surgical treated orbital floor fractures (i.e. diplopia, en- or exophthalmus) reveal that thin resorbable foils, particularly 0.15 mm diameter PDS-foil seem to generate best results referring to orbital floor defects with a size of 250 to 300 mm(2). Study number 4222, year 2013, ethics committee of the medical faculty of the Heinrich Heine university of Duesseldorf.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 10 20%
Researcher 8 16%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 10 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 54%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Materials Science 2 4%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 14 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 January 2016.
All research outputs
#18,434,182
of 22,837,982 outputs
Outputs from Head & Face Medicine
#183
of 334 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,137
of 393,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Head & Face Medicine
#11
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,837,982 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 334 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 393,343 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.