Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 5, 2026
Three-Dimensional Reconstruction of Orbital Fractures
Published on: May 16, 2025
Malpositioned orbital implants: indications for implant removal and secondary reconstructive techniques
Sara M Hussein1, Basel A Sharaf1, Krishna Sinha2
1Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Background:
Malpositioned orbital implants are an underappreciated source of significant postoperative morbidity, often necessitating revision surgery. Decision-making regarding practical frameworks to guide revision remains challenging and is not well standardized or characterized.
Objective:
To analyze clinical presentations, radiographic failure patterns, multidisciplinary surgical strategies, and outcomes of patients undergoing revision surgery for malpositioned orbital implants.
Methods:
A single-center retrospective consecutive case series was conducted of patients who underwent removal or replacement of malpositioned orbital implants. Patient demographics, presenting symptoms, radiographic findings, surgical approaches, implant management strategies, and postoperative outcomes were reviewed. Most cases were co-managed by plastic/reconstructive and oculoplastic surgeons. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize findings.
Results:
Five of seven patients (71.4%) were female, with a median age of 60 years (range 29-78). Diplopia was the most common presenting symptom (5/7, 71.4%) along with pain or swelling (5/7, 71.4%) followed by globe malposition (3/7, 42.9%). CT demonstrated implant protrusion into orbital soft tissue in 4/7 patients (57.1%) and peri-implant inflammatory collections in 3/7 (42.9%). Out of our 7 revision cases, four patients (57.1%) underwent explantation alone, and three (42.9%) underwent secondary reconstruction with custom or semi-custom implants. At follow-up, diplopia improved or resolved in 4/5 affected patients (80%), and pain, swelling, and globe position improved in all symptomatic patients.
Conclusion:
Malpositioned orbital implants demonstrate heterogeneous failure mechanisms that require individualized surgical management. A multidisciplinary approach can guide decision-making regarding implant removal versus revision of reconstruction, enabling safe revision surgery and favorable clinical outcomes. Additionally, virtual surgical planning and intraoperative navigation are enablers of safe and precise revision orbital surgery.
