An evaluation of the support provided by common internal orbital reconstruction materials

Purpose: The objectives of this investigation were to assess the weight of the combined intern:ll orbital contents, to evaluate the ability of common internal orbital reconstruction materials to resist lends, and to determine whether these materials provide enough load resistance to support the orbi tal contents. Materials and Methods: The combined exonerated internal orbital contents (g lobe, fat, extraocular musculature, neurovascular structures, lacrimal appa ratus, and musculocutaneous lids) from 16 human orbits were weighed. Five e ach of 13 different internal orbital reconstruction materials (titanium mes h, bioresorbables, Marlex [CR Bard, Cranston, RI], Medpore [Porex Medical, College Park, GA], Silastic [Dow Corning, Midland, MI], dried calvarium) we re evaluated for their ability to resist loads applied by Instron 85.11 mec hanical testing device (Canton, MA) when used to reconstruct uniform orbita l floor defects in synthetic skulls (Sawbones, Vashon Island, WA). Yield lo ad, yield displacement, maximum load, and displacement at maximum load were measured. A comparison was then made between orbital content weight and th e load-resisting capabilities of the various materials. Results: The weight of the combined internal orbital contents was 42.97 +/- 4.05 g (range, 37.80 to 51.03 g). All of the materials tested except Marle x mesh met or exceeded the requirements for support of the combined interna l orbital contents. Conclusion: Except in the instance of complete loss of the orbital floor, a ll of the materials tested should provide adequate orbital support.