R_Bibb_Medical_Modelling_The_Application_of_Adv.pdf

Case studies 147
6.28 Plain radiograph in the lateral plane showing the position of the
implant post-operatively.
techniques are simple and readily available in most maxillofacial laboratories.
The models require off-site production, but their use is particularly
valid in cases where defects may be complicated in three dimensions and
where operating time should be reduced to a minimum. The cost of construction
of models will drop substantially if numbers increase, and the
technique may offer a fi nancially viable alternative to current orbital fl oor
prostheses.
6.5.6 References
1. Courtney D J, Thomas S, Whitfi eld P H (2000), ‘Isolated orbital blow out fractures:
survey and review’, British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 38,
496–503.
2. Morriston A D, Sanderson R, Moos K F (1995), ‘The use of silastic as an orbital
implant for reconstruction of orbital wall defects: review of 311 cases treated
over 20 years’, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 53, 412–17.
3. Rubin P A D, Bilyk J R, Shore J W (1994), ‘Orbital reconstruction using porous
polyethylene sheets’, Opthalmology, 101, 1697–708.
4. Iizuka T, Mikkonen P, Paukku P, Lindqvist C (1991), ‘Reconstruction of orbital
fl oor with polydioxanone plate’, International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial
Surgery, 20 (2), 83–7.
5. Kinnunen I, Aitasalo K, Pollonen M, Varpula (2000), ‘Reconstruction of orbital
fl oor fractures using bioactive glass’, Journal of Craniomaxillofacial Surgery, 4,
229–34.