Full-text resources of PSJD and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

PL EN


Preferences help
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results

Journal

2015 | 2 | 4 | 292-298

Article title

Usunięcie gałki ocznej – techniki i wskazania

Authors

Content

Title variants

EN
Enucleation and evisceration – techniques and indications

Languages of publication

PL

Abstracts

PL
Celem pracy jest przedstawienie problemów związanych z usunięciem gałki ocznej (problemy kosmetyczne, poenukleacyjny zespół oczodołu, pooperacyjna ruchomość protezy i zanik spojówki) oraz opisanie wad i zalet różnych metod tego zabiegu (enukleacja, ewisceracja). Omówiono również wybór tych metod w zależności od wskazań do usunięcia gałki.
EN
In the paper the problems of eyeball removal (cosmetic, post-enucleation socket syndrome, post-operative prostheses mobility and conjunctival atrophy) are described and advantages and disadvantages of different surgical methods of eyeball removal (enucleation, evisceration) are discussed. The choice of surgical method depending on indication for eyeball removal is also discussed.

Keywords

Discipline

Publisher

Journal

Year

Volume

2

Issue

4

Pages

292-298

Physical description

Contributors

  • Klinika Okulistyczna, Wojskowy Instytut Medycyny Lotniczej w Warszawie

References

  • 1. Phan LT, Hwang TN, McCulley TJ. Evisceration in the modern age. MEAJO 2012; 19: 24-33.
  • 2. Green WR, Maumenee AE, Sanders TE, Smith ME. Sympathetic uveitis following evisceration. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol 1972; 76: 625-644.
  • 3. Prost M. Wszczepy oczodołowe w leczeniu poenukleacyjnego zespołu oczodołu. Okulistyka 2008; XI: 13-19.
  • 4. Culler AM. Orbital implants after enucleation; basic principles of anatomy and physiology of the orbit and relation to implant surgery. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol 1952; 56: 17-20.
  • 5. Smit TJ, Koornneef L, Zonneveld FW. Computed tomography in the assessment of the postenucleation socket syndrome. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 1347-1351.
  • 6. Tyers AG, Collin JR. Orbital implants and post enucleation socket syndrome. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK 1982; 102(1): 90-92.
  • 7. Mules PH. Evisceration of the globe with artificial vitreous. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK 1885; 5: 200-206.
  • 8. Kelley JJ. History of ocular prosthesis. Int Ophthalmol Clin 1970; 10: 713-719.
  • 9. Sami D, Young S, Petersen R. Perspective on orbital enucleation implants. Surv Ophthalmol 2001; 52: 244-265.
  • 10. Chalasani R, Poole-Warren L, Conway RM, Ben-Nissan B. Porous implants in enucleation: a systematic review. Surv Ophthalmol 2007; 52: 145-155.
  • 11. Bigham WJ, Stanley P, Cahill JM. Fibrovascular ingrowth in porous orbital implants: the effect of the material composition, porosity, growth factors, and coatings. Ophthal Plast Resconstr Surg 1999; 15: 317-325.
  • 12. Rubin PA, Popham JK, Bilyk JR, Shore JW. Comparison of fibrovascular ingrowth into hydroxyapatite and porous polyethylene orbital implants. Ophthal Plast Resconstr Surg 1994; 10: 96-103.
  • 13. Hing KA, Best SM, Tanner KE, et al. Mediation of bone ingrowth in porous hydroxyapatite bone graft substitutes. J Biomed Mater Res 2004; 68: 187-200.
  • 14. De Potter P, Shields CI, Shields JA, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of the hydroxyapatite orbital implant. Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 824-830.
  • 15. Prost ME. Ewisceracja gałki – powrót dawnej metody leczenia chirurgicznego. Referat wygłoszony na XLVI Zjeździe Okulistów Polskich, Poznań 18–20.06.2015.

Document Type

article

Publication order reference

Identifiers

YADDA identifier

bwmeta1.element.psjd-d71bb6df-e6d9-4ecc-9657-fb88bd7161d2
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.