Search

Francesco M Quaranta-Leoni,1,2 Maria Grazia Fiorino,1 Flavia Quaranta-Leoni,3 Matteo Di Marino1 1Orbital and Adnexal Service, Villa Tiberia Hospital – GVM Care & Research, Rome, 00137, Italy; 2Oftalmoplastica Roma, Rome, 00197, Italy; 3Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, 00168, ItalyCorrespondence: Francesco M Quaranta-Leoni Email fquarantaleoni@gmail.comAbstract: Anophthalmic socket syndrome determines functional deficits and facial deformities, and may lead to poor psychological outcomes. This review aims to comprehensively evaluate the features of the syndrome, based on literature review and authors’ clinical and surgical experience. An electronic database (PubMed,MEDLINE and Google Scholar) search of all articles written in English and non-English language with abstract translated to English on anophthalmic socket syndrome was performed. Data reviewed included demographics, presentations, investigations, management, complications and outcomes. Different types of orbital implants were evaluated; the management of implant exposure was examined; different orbital volume enhancement procedures such as secondary implantation, subperiosteal implants and the use of fillers in anophthalmic patients were described; the problems related to socket contraction were outlined; the treatment options for chronic anophthalmic socket pain and phantom eye syndrome were assessed; the most recent advances in the management of congenital anophthalmia were described. Current clinical evidence does not support a specific orbital implant; late exposure of porous implants may be due to pegging, which currently is seldom used; filler absorption in the orbit appears to be faster than in the dermis, and repeated treatments could be a potential source of inflammation; socket contraction results in significant functional and psychological disability, and management is challenging. Patients affected by anophthalmic socket pain and phantom eye syndrome need specific counseling. It is auspicable to use a standardized protocol to treat children affected by clinical congenital anophthalmia; dermis fat graft is a suitable option in these patients as it helps continued socket expansion. Dermis fat graft can also address the volume deficit in case of explantation of exposed implants and in contracted sockets in both children and adults. Appropriate clinical care is essential, as adequate prosthesis wearing improves the quality of life of anophthalmic patients.Keywords: orbital implants, socket surgery, contracted socket, phantom eye syndrome, congenital anophthalmia

Objectives: Autologous dermis fat graft (DFG) is being used in both primary and secondary socket surgeries. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate patients’ satisfaction and possible intra- and postoperative complications in patients who had DFG transplantation. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, the results of 17 patients who were operated between October 2008 and October 2012 were evaluated. Of these cases, 7 had primary and 10 had secondary DFG. Patient satisfaction was evaluated by asking the patients to fill out a questionnaire graded from 1 (not satisfied) to 4 (very satisfied). Additionally, the incidence of complications and requirement for another operation was noted. Results: The average patient age was 30.5±17.9 years. Patients with primary grafts were 100% satisfied with the outcome and could wear their prosthesis without any discomfort. In this group, one patient had delay in epithelialisation of the graft and ptosis, which was treated with frontal sling surgery and artificial tears. In patients with secondary grafts, 6 patients (60%) were satisfied with the outcome. Four patients were not satisfied from the result. One had inferior lid laxity; however, after lateral tarsal strip surgery, she could wear her prosthesis. Another patient developed inferior forniceal adhesion. He was treated with mucous membrane grafting and artificial tears and could wear his prosthesis. One patient had infection and contraction of the socket due to inappropriate postoperative medication use. Following repeated DFG transplantation, he was able to wear his prosthesis. Another patient had fat atrophy prior to secondary DFG transplantation and developed atrophy of the graft following surgery. Her family refused additional surgery. This patient could not wear any prosthesis. Conclusion: According to our results, we believe that DFG transplantation is successful in primary implantation. In secondary cases, correct patient selection is important to achieve good outcome. (Turk J Ophthalmol 2015; 45: 65-70)

Objectives: Autologous dermis fat graft (DFG) is being used in both primary and secondary socket surgeries. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate patients' satisfaction and possible intra- and postoperative complications in patients who had DFG transplantation. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, the results of 17 patients who were operated between October 2008 and October 2012 were evaluated. Of these cases, 7 had primary and 10 had secondary DFG. Patient satisfaction was evaluated by asking the patients to fill out a questionnaire graded from 1 (not satisfied) to 4 (very satisfied). Additionally, the incidence of complications and requirement for another operation was noted. Results: The average patient age was 30.5±17.9 years. Patients with primary grafts were 100% satisfied with the outcome and could wear their prosthesis without any discomfort. In this group, one patient had delay in epithelialisation of the graft and ptosis, which was treated with frontal sling surgery and artificial tears. In patients with secondary grafts, 6 patients (60%) were satisfied with the outcome. Four patients were not satisfied from the result. One had inferior lid laxity; however, after lateral tarsal strip surgery, she could wear her prosthesis. Another patient developed inferior forniceal adhesion. He was treated with mucous membrane grafting and artificial tears and could wear his prosthesis. One patient had infection and contraction of the socket due to inappropriate postoperative medication use. Following repeated DFG transplantation, he was able to wear his prosthesis. Another patient had fat atrophy prior to secondary DFG transplantation and developed atrophy of the graft following surgery. Her family refused additional surgery. This patient could not wear any prosthesis. Conclusion: According to our results, we believe that DFG transplantation is successful in primary implantation. In secondary cases, correct patient selection is important to achieve good outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]