Clinical Outcomes of Transconjunctival Vs Transcutaneous Approaches in Orbital Fracture Repair

Overview

Open reduction and internal fixation of zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures has a challenging impact on the selection of the suitable surgical approach to the orbital and zygomatic skeleton. Precise repair of the ZMC fractures needs a quite understanding of the regional anatomy, precise diagnosis, an accessible exposure, and an accurate rigid fixation of fracture to restore the normal form. The aesthetic results are one of the most important requirements for these incisions in facial fracture reduction. Conventional approaches to the infraorbital rim/orbital floor include transcutaneous as subciliary, subtarsal and infraorbital incisions and transconjunctival incision. A thorough understanding of each incisional technique requires an appreciation of the relevant anatomy putting in considerations the risk of associated complications. Aim of this study:To compare between transconjunctival approach and transcutaneous approaches in open reduction of zygomaticomaxillary fracture. Materials and methods: A study will be made on 75 patients who will undergo fracture repair of the zygomaticomaxillary complex. Twenty five of them (group A) will be treated via a subtarsal approach while. Other Twenty five patients (group B) via a transconjunctival approach. The remaining Twenty five patients (Group C) will be treated via infraorbital appeoach. Postoperative patient evaluation will be performed with specific attention paid towards, accessibility, the exposure duration (time from incision till exposure of the field), esthetic appearance ,postoperative pain, postoperative edema , wound healing, scaring, infection and postoperative ocular complications such as ectropion, entropion, scleral show and corneal abrasion. Postoperatively clinical examination along with radiographic examination will be done to evaluate the position of the zygoma and determine the adequacy of fracture reduction. Results: will be statistically analyzed using the IBM Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) software version 22.0