Do Orbital Implants Differ in Complication Rates: A Retrospective Study of 88 Patients, and an Argument for Cost-Effective Practices in the Face of Rising Health Care Costs

Abstract

AbstractOperative repair of orbital fractures utilizes implants constructed of a plethora of materials that vary in cost. Surgeon preference as well as fracture complexity may dictate the implant chosen. In this study, we retrospectively compared the complication rates of the four most common types of implants utilized at our institution. We found no significant difference in complication rates in our sample of 88 patients. Additionally, the least expensive implant was as effective as the most expensive implant in addressing isolated orbital blowout fractures. This situation is not unique to the field of oculoplastics. As evidenced from published literature in other areas of surgery, from orthopaedics to orthodontics, cheaper alternatives often afford similar outcomes as more expensive options. We herein argue that a cost-effective approach should be considered while still allowing for high quality of care, in the face of rising health care costs and health disparities in America.