Autogenous Ramus Graft versus Alloplastic Titanium Mesh in Orbital Floor Reconstruction

The management of orbital fractures is one of the most interesting areas in facial trauma. No consensus exists on the choice of implants which is used for orbital floor reconstruction. Here we present the short term results of the outcome of ramus autogenous graft versus alloplastic materials in a randomized prospective clinical trial.
Methods and A total of 22 patients with orbital floor fracture were entered to our study in two groups¡ randomly. Patients of first group were treated by autograft of lateral cortex from mandibular ramus¡ and the patients of second group by titanium mesh as an alloplastic material. All patients were followed for six months and enophthalmos¡ diplopia¡ cheek paresthesia and infection rate were assessed.
There were no significant difference between two groups (P value = 0.66). Both mandibular ramus and alloplastic titanium mesh can be used in orbital floor reconstruction regardless of size of defect.
Both mandibular ramus autograft and alloplastic titanium mesh are reliable and successful techniques to address the orbital floor fracture. Ramus region provides an appropriate volume of bone with vascularization¡ low extrusion rate and inert¡ but donor site morbidity and more time-consuming are disadvantages. Highly biocompatibility¡ minimal resorption potential¡ wellrecognized osseointegration and contouring¡ no donor site morbidity and less time consuming are advantages of titanium mesh¡ but its disadvantages include the risk of graft extrusion or anticipated difficulty while insertion and removing the material if needed because of fibrous ingrowth and also additional cost requirement .