Commentary: Using newer technology for an unresolved clinical dilemma

Raj Anand¹

Affiliations

Comment

Raj Anand. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2018 Nov.

. 2018 Nov;66(11):1607-1608.

doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1127_18.

Raj Anand¹

No abstract available

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest

Low-cost three-dimensional printed orbital template-assisted patient-specific implants for the correction of spherical orbital implant migration.
Dave TV, Tiple S, Vempati S, Palo M, Ali MJ, Kaliki S, Naik MN. Dave TV, et al. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2018 Nov;66(11):1600-1607. doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_472_18. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2018. PMID: 30355870 Free PMC article.

1. Shome D, Honavar SG, Raizada K, Raizada D. Implant and prosthesis movement after enucleation. Ophthalmol. 2010;117:1638–44. - PubMed
1. Allen L. the argument against imbricating the rectus muscle over spherical orbital implant after enucleation. Ophthalmol. 1983;90:1116–20. - PubMed
1. Nentwich MM, Schebitz-Walter K, Hirneiss C, Hintschich C. Dermis fat grafts as primary and secondary orbital implants. Orbit. 2014;33:33–8. - PubMed
1. Sundelin KC, Dafgard Kopp EM. Complications associated with secondary orbital implantations. Acta Ophthalmol. 2015;93:679–83. - PubMed
1. Dave TV, Gaur G, Chowdary N, Joshi D. Customized 3D printing: A novel approach to migrated orbital implant. Saudi J of Ophthalmol. 2018 [In press] - PMC - PubMed