Differences Between Medpor Monotherapy And A Combination Of Titanium Mesh With Medpor In Orbital Fracture Repair

Objective: Orbital implants primarily include autogenous bone, silica gel, hydroxyapatite (HA), Medpor, and titanium mesh, but are without uniform standards for which patients to choose an implant. This study was designed to investigate the dissimilarities in effects between titanium mesh combined with Medpor and Medpor monotherapy in orbital fractures. Methods: A total of 97 patients with orbital fractures were divided into a control group (n=45) and an observation group (n=42). The control group was treated with Medpor while the observation group received titanium mesh following Medpor. Results: The observation group had higher incidence of Grade 0 diplopia than the control group 6 months after operation (P<0.05) but lower grades I and II diplopia (P<0.05). Grade 0 dyskinesia occurred more frequently in the observation group other than in the control group 6 months after operation (P<0.05), but Grade I and II dyskinesia were on the contrary (P<0.05). It took less time for the observation group to have postoperative swelling and pain subside, together with lower AQP4 expression, by comparison with the control group (both P<0.05). The observation group showed higher incidence of enophthalmos and mild enophthalmos than the control group (P<0.05), while the case was on the opposite in terms of moderate and severe enophthalmos (P<0.05). The difference in incidences of postoperative complications between the two groups was not of statistical significance (P>0.05). Conclusion: The combination of titanium mesh with Medpor may result favorably, specially, reduce diplopia, downgrade dyskinesia, help shorten the time that it takes for swelling and pain to subside, lower AQP4 level in orbital fracture repair, and lead to less incidence of post-operation enophthalmos.