Comparison among Histological Outcomes of Different Materials used for Reconstruction of the Orbit

Orbital wall fractures may lead to significant functional and aesthetic morbidity. Sometimes reconstruction is warranted to restore them. The material used for orbital wall reconstruction needs to be rigid and provide the best mechanical stability and least tissue reactions. Choosing implants could be based upon subjective opinions. Alloplastics had a higher chance of infection or other reactions. Autografts offer better compatibility with limitations of adaptation. Most used implant materials had perforations allowing better shaping and modifications. We investigated the effect of perforations on healing. We chose 12 rabbits and do defects in the floor with reconstruction by perforated and continuous titanium implant. A histological examination was done after 3 months. Macroscopic evaluation of wounds` healing shows no sign of inflammation or infection. The implant was well integrated within the tissues although it had not been fixed. Inflammation type, neovascularization, fibrosis amount and the presence of giant cells were investigated. In the case of the continuous implants, the healing was excellent, in the case of perforated orbital implants more signs of inflammation were evident. We conclude that the continuous implant could provide a better healing milieu.