DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Reliability of the Transconjunctival Approach for Orbital Exposure: Measurement of Positional Changes in the Lower Eyelid

  • Yoon, Sung Ho (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Inje University Haeundae Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Jin Hoon (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Inje University Haeundae Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2017.09.24
  • Accepted : 2017.12.11
  • Published : 2017.12.20

Abstract

Background: Lower eyelid incisions are widely used for the orbital approach in periorbital trauma and aesthetic surgery. In general, the subciliary approach is known to cause disposition of the lower eyelid by scarring the anterior lamella in some cases. On the other hand, many surgeons believe that a transconjunctival approach usually does not result in such complications and is a reliable method. We measured positional changes in the lower eyelid in blowout fracture repair since entropion is one of the most serious complications of the transconjunctival orbital approach. Methods: To measure the positional changes in the lower eyelids, we analyzed preoperative and postoperative photographs over various time intervals. In the analysis of the photographs, marginal reflex distance 2 ($MRD_2$) and eyelash angle were used as an index of eyelid position. Statistical analyses were performed to identify the significance in the positional changes. All patients underwent orbital reconstruction through a transconjunctival incision by a single plastic surgeon. Results: In 42 blowout fracture patients, there was no statistical significant difference in the MRD2 and eyelash angle. Furthermore, there were no clinical complications, such as infection, hematoma, bleeding, or implant protrusion, during the follow-up periods. Conclusion: The advantages of the transconjunctival approach for orbital access include minimal scarring and a lower risk of eyelid displacement compared with other approaches. Based on these results, we recommend the transconjunctival approach for orbital exposure as a safe and reliable method.

Keywords

References

  1. Kim YK, Kim JW. Evaluation of subciliary incision used in blowout fracture treatment: pretarsal flattening after lower eyelid surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010;125:1479-84.
  2. Appling WD, Patrinely JR, Salzer TA. Transconjunctival approach vs subciliary skin-muscle flap approach for orbital fracture repair. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1993;119:1000-7.
  3. Lorenz HP, Longaker MT, Kawamoto HK Jr. Primary and secondary orbit surgery: the transconjunctival approach. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999;103:1124-8.
  4. Novelli G, Ferrari L, Sozzi D, Mazzoleni F, Bozzetti A. Transconjunctival approach in orbital traumatology: a review of 56 cases. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2011; 39:266-70.
  5. Korchia D, Braccini F, Paris J, Thomassin J. Transconjunctival approach in lower eyelid blepharoplasty. Can J Plast Surg 2003;11:166-70.
  6. Mullins JB, Holds JB, Branham GH, Thomas JR. Complications of the transconjunctival approach: a review of 400 cases. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997;123:385-8.
  7. Westfall CT, Shore JW, Nunery WR, Hawes MJ, Yaremchuk MJ. Operative complications of the transconjunctival inferior fornix approach. Ophthalmology 1991; 98:1525-8.
  8. Zarem HA, Resnick JI. Expanded applications for transconjunctival lower lid blepharoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 1991;88:215-20.
  9. Baumann A, Ewers R. Use of the preseptal transconjunctival approach in orbit reconstruction surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001;59:287-91.
  10. Ho VH, Rowland JP Jr, Linder JS. Sutureless transconjunctival repair of orbital blowout fractures. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2004;20:458-60.
  11. Taban M, Taban M, Perry JD. Lower eyelid position after transconjunctival lower blepharoplasty with versus without a skin pinch. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2008;24:7-9.
  12. Segal KL, Patel P, Levine B, Lisman RD, Lelli GJ Jr. The effect of transconjunctival blepharoplasty on margin reflex distance 2. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2016;40:13-8.
  13. Wong JW, Gallant-Behm C, Wiebe C, Mak K, Hart DA, Larjava H, et al. Wound healing in oral mucosa results in reduced scar formation as compared with skin: evidence from the red Duroc pig model and humans. Wound Repair Regen 2009;17:717-29.
  14. Szpaderska AM, Zuckerman JD, DiPietro LA. Differential injury responses in oral mucosal and cutaneous wounds. J Dent Res 2003;82:621-6.
  15. Lai Y, Gallo RL. AMPed up immunity: how antimicrobial peptides have multiple roles in immune defense. Trends Immunol 2009;30:131-41.
  16. Zhou L, Huang LQ, Beuerman RW, Grigg ME, Li SF, Chew FT, et al. Proteomic analysis of human tears: defensin expression after ocular surface surgery. J Proteome Res 2004;3:410-6.
  17. Li J, Raghunath M, Tan D, Lareu RR, Chen Z, Beuerman RW. Defensins HNP1 and HBD2 stimulation of wound-associated responses in human conjunctival fibroblasts. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47:3811-9.

Cited by

  1. Delayed reconstruction of posttraumatic facial deformities vol.61, pp.12, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5124/jkma.2018.61.12.740