From Autologous Bone Tissue to Bioengineered Material Solutions in Post-Traumatic Orbital Wall Reconstruction: An Overview
Source abstract
Abstract
Orbital wall fractures are a common consequence of trauma-related craniofacial injuries. Multistage treatment and poor functional and aesthetic results render the reconstruction of an orbit extremely challenging. Advances in surgical technologies, imaging software, and biomaterials have continuously improved outcomes. The choice of materials plays a critical role in patient outcomes. Over time, the type of material involved advanced from autografts (autologous tissues such as bone grafts and muscle flaps) to allografts (metals, ceramics, plastic materials, or combinations of these materials). In this study, we provide a comprehensive overview of the latest scientific insights, including the advantages and disadvantages of each material used in terms of stability, cost, safety, biocompatibility, durability, and intraoperative readiness. Bioengineered solutions seem to be the future of orbital wall reconstruction; both material and technological innovations hold promise for further advancements.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Facial Trauma and Fracture Management · Head and Neck Surgical Oncology · Ocular Disorders and Treatments
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020021 Bucharest, Romania
Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, Life Memorial Hospital, 010719 Bucharest, Romania
Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
Titu Maiorescu University, 040051 Bucharest, Romania
Victor Gomoiu Children Clinical Hospital, 022102 Bucharest, Romania
Bine Clinic, 020483 Bucharest, Romania
Department of Ophthalmology, Emergency University Hospital, 050013 Bucharest, Romania
References (95)
Show source-provided references
1. Epidemiology of motor vehicle accident-associated ocular trauma10.1007/s10792-024-03356-7 ↗
2. Prevalence of Ocular Injuries Following Road Traffic Accidents Among Two-Wheeler Riders/Pillions and the Factors Influencing Them Reported in a Tertiary Care Center in Chengalpattu in Tamil Nadu, India
3. The Burden of Road Traffic Accidents on Facial Fractures: National Trends, Injury Patterns, and Disparities in 154,185 Patients10.1177/19433875241272440 ↗
4. Contemporary management of orbital blowout fractures10.1097/MOO.0000000000000550 ↗
5. Vasile, V.A., Istrate, S., Iancu, R.C., Piticescu, R.M., Cursaru, L.M., Schmetterer, L., Garhöfer, G., and Cherecheanu, A.P. (2022). Biocompatible Materials for Orbital Wall Reconstruction—An Overview. Materials, 15.10.3390/ma15062183 ↗
6. Controversies in orbital reconstruction—III. Biomaterials for orbital reconstruction: A review with clinical recommendations10.1016/j.ijom.2015.06.024 ↗
7. Kauke-Navarro, M., Knoedler, L., Baecher, H., Sherwani, K., Knoedler, S., Allam, O., Diatta, F., Alperovich, M., and Safi, A.-F. (2025). A systematic review of implant materials for facial reconstructive and aesthetic surgery. Front. Surg., 12.10.3389/fsurg.2025.1548597 ↗
8. Posttraumatic diplopia and osseous grafts. Observations
9. Selection of Materials for Orbital Floor Reconstruction10.1001/archotol.124.12.1398 ↗
10. Experience in the use of calvarial bone grafts in orbital reconstruction10.1016/0266-4356(92)90077-V ↗
11. Taking calvarial grafts, either split in situ or splitting of the parietal bone flap ex vivo--tools and techniques: V. A 9650-case experience in craniofacial and maxillofacial surgery10.1097/01.prs.0000173949.51391.d4 ↗
12. Reconstruction of internal orbital wall fracture with iliac crest free bone graft: Clinical, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging follow-up study10.1097/01.prs.0000244519.26368.4c ↗
13. Orbital floor reconstruction with autogenous bone harvested from the mandibular lingual cortex10.1016/0266-4356(92)90134-5 ↗
14. Orbital wall reconstruction with bone grafts from the outer cortex of the mandible10.1016/j.jcms.2004.06.006 ↗
15. Reconstruction of the orbitozygomatic framework: State of the art and perspectives10.1016/j.jormas.2024.101788 ↗
16. Cartilage regeneration10.5435/JAAOS-21-05-303 ↗
17. Autogenous Grafts for Orbital Floor Reconstruction: A review10.17352/2455-4634.000031 ↗
18. A systematic literature review and narrative synthesis on the use of autologous cartilage in the repair of orbital fractures10.1097/MS9.0000000000001598 ↗
19. Management of orbital fractures: Challenges and solutions10.2147/OPTH.S80463 ↗
20. Orbital implants for fracture repair10.1097/ICU.0b013e3283499409 ↗
21. Sourcing and development of tissue for transplantation in reconstructive surgery: A narrative review10.1016/j.bjps.2023.05.001 ↗
22. Engineering in vitro immune-competent tissue models for testing and evaluation of therapeutics10.1016/j.addr.2022.114111 ↗
23. Grafts and implants10.1016/S0030-6665(20)31972-1 ↗
24. Use of demineralized bone implants in orbital and craniofacial reconstruction and a review of the literature10.1097/00002341-199606000-00005 ↗
25. Reconstruction of the orbital floor using supercritical CO2 decellularized porcine bone graft10.7150/ijms.64359 ↗
26. Biomaterials and implants for orbital floor repair10.1016/j.actbio.2011.05.016 ↗
27. Materials to facilitate orbital reconstruction and soft tissue filling in posttraumatic orbital deformaties10.20517/2347-9264.2015.122 ↗
28. Biomaterials for craniofacial reconstruction10.1055/s-0028-1119515 ↗
29. A state-of-the-art review of the fabrication and characteristics of titanium and its alloys for biomedical applications10.1007/s42242-021-00170-3 ↗
30. Biocompatibility of titanium from the viewpoint of its surface10.1080/14686996.2022.2106156 ↗
31. Treatments for enhancing the biocompatibility of titanium implants10.5507/bp.2019.062 ↗
32. General review of titanium toxicity10.1186/s40729-019-0162-x ↗
33. Marin, E., and Lanzutti, A. (2023). Biomedical Applications of Titanium Alloys: A Comprehensive Review. Materials, 17.10.3390/ma17010114 ↗
34. Customised products for orbital wall reconstruction: A systematic review10.1016/j.bjoms.2021.10.005 ↗
35. “6 Anatomical Landmarks” Technique for Satisfactory Free-Hand Orbital Reconstruction With Standard Preformed Titanium Mesh10.1177/19433875211007614 ↗
36. A Systematic Approach for Making 3D-Printed Patient-Specific Implants for Craniomaxillofacial Reconstruction10.1016/j.eng.2020.02.019 ↗
37. Fracture of titanium plates used for mandibular reconstruction following ablative tumor surgery10.1002/jbm.b.30603 ↗
38. Material analysis of AO plate fracture cases10.1016/j.joms.2003.05.009 ↗
39. Vasile, V.A., Pirvulescu, R.A., Iancu, R.C., Garhöfer, G., Schmetterer, L., Ghita, A.M., Ionescu, D., Istrate, S., Piticescu, R.M., and Cursaru, L.M. (2024). Titanium Implants Coated with Hydroxyapatite Used in Orbital Wall Reconstruction—A Literature Review. Materials, 17.10.3390/ma17071676 ↗
40. Orbital Reconstruction: Patient-Specific Orbital Floor Reconstruction Using a Mirroring Technique and a Customized Titanium Mesh10.1097/SCS.0000000000002907 ↗
41. Low-Cost, Three-Dimensionally–Printed, Anatomical Models for Optimization of Orbital Wall Reconstruction10.1097/PRS.0000000000007495 ↗
42. Orbital Fracture Reconstruction Using Prebent, Anatomic Titanium Plates: Technical Tips to Avoid Complications10.1097/SCS.0000000000004563 ↗
43. Isolated Orbital Fractures Are Severe Among Geriatric Patients10.1016/j.joms.2017.09.019 ↗
44. Bettschen, D., Tsichlaki, D., Chatzimichail, E., Klukowska-Rötzler, J., Müller, M., Sauter, T.C., Exadaktylos, A.K., Ziaka, M., Doulberis, M., and Burkhard, J.-P. (2024). Epidemiology of maxillofacial trauma in elderly patients receiving oral anticoagulant or antithrombotic medication; a Swiss retrospective study. BMC Emerg. Med., 24.10.1186/s12873-024-01039-1 ↗
45. Carbonated Apatite and Hydroxyapatite in Craniofacial Reconstruction10.1001/archfaci.5.5.379 ↗
46. Nanostructured hydroxyapatite used as an augmenting material to expand the orbit
47. Analysis of the postoperative outcome in 405 cases of orbital fracture using 2 synthetic orbital implants10.1097/01.sap.0000199173.73610.bc ↗
48. Gradinaru, S., Popescu, L.M., Piticescu, R.M., Zurac, S., Ciuluvica, R., Burlacu, A., Tutuianu, R., Valsan, S.-N., Motoc, A.M., and Voinea, L.M. (2016). Repair of the orbital wall fractures in rabbit animal model using nanostructured hydroxyapatite-based implant. Nanomaterials, 6.10.3390/nano6010011 ↗
49. Tang, S., Shen, Y., Jiang, L., and Zhang, Y. (2024). Surface Modification of Nano-Hydroxyapatite/Polymer Composite for Bone Tissue Repair Applications: A Review. Polymers, 16.10.3390/polym16091263 ↗
50. Perspectives on resorbable osteosynthesis materials in craniomaxillofacial surgery10.1159/000348328 ↗
51. On, S.W., Cho, S.W., Byun, S.H., and Yang, B.E. (2020). Bioabsorbable osteofixation materials for maxillofacial bone surgery: A review on polymers and magnesium-based materials. Biomedicines, 8.10.3390/biomedicines8090300 ↗
52. Satchanska, G., Davidova, S., and Petrov, P.D. (2024). Natural and Synthetic Polymers for Biomedical and Environmental Applications. Polymers, 16.10.3390/polym16081159 ↗
53. The natural history of alloplastic implants in orbital floor reconstruction: An animal model10.1097/00001665-199402000-00007 ↗
54. Cranio-orbital reconstruction: Safety and image quality of metallic implants on CT and MRI scanning10.1097/00006534-199410000-00004 ↗
55. Clinical outcome of 285 Medpor grafts used for craniofacial reconstruction10.1097/01.scs.0000168761.46700.dc ↗
56. The use of silastic as an orbital implant for reconstruction of orbital wall defects: Review of 311 cases treated over 20 years10.1016/0278-2391(95)90714-9 ↗
57. Complications of silastic implants used in orbital repair
58. Modified procedure for reconstructing the inferomedial orbital wall: Silicone sheet implantation without surgical removal10.1007/s00405-023-08257-6 ↗
59. Biomaterials and host versus graft response: A short review
60. Treatment of orbital fractures: The case for treatment with resorbable materials10.1016/j.joms.2003.12.024 ↗
61. Resorbable PLLA–PGA fixation in pediatric craniofacial surgery: Clinical experience in 188 consecutive cases10.1097/00006534-199707000-00001 ↗
62. Polydioxanone implants: A systematic review on safety and performance in patients10.1177/0885328219888841 ↗
63. Retrospective analysis of orbital floor fractures--complications, outcome, and review of literature10.1007/s00784-010-0385-y ↗
64. Orbital Floor Fractures: Treatment and Diagnostics—A Survey Among Swiss, German and Austrian Maxillofacial Units10.1177/19433875241245498 ↗
65. Clinical evaluation of the efficacy of materials used for primary reconstruction of orbital floor defects: Meta-analysis10.1002/hed.26518 ↗
66. Composite implants in oculoplastic surgery10.3109/08820538.2010.518919 ↗
67. Kim, J., and Kang, D. (Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 2025). Absorbable Versus Non-absorbable Implants for Orbital Fracture Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis, Plast. Reconstr. Surg., Epub ahead of print.10.1097/PRS.0000000000012560 ↗
68. Patient-specific Implants for Orbital Fractures: A Systematic Review10.1097/IOP.0000000000002089 ↗
69. Thin PDS Foils Represent an Equally Favorable Restorative Material for Orbital Floor Fractures Compared to Titanium Meshes10.3390/tomography9040121 ↗
70. Dubron, K., Verbist, M., Jacobs, R., Olszewski, R., Shaheen, E., and Willaert, R. (2023). Augmented and Virtual Reality for Preoperative Trauma Planning, Focusing on Orbital Reconstructions: A Systematic Review. J. Clin. Med., 12.10.3390/jcm12165203 ↗
71. Customized Titanium Mesh Based on the 3D Printed Model vs. Manual Intraoperative Bending of Titanium Mesh for Reconstructing of Orbital Bone Fracture: A Randomized Clinical Trial10.2174/1574887112666170821165206 ↗
72. Preformed vs intraoperative bending of titanium mesh for orbital reconstruction10.1177/0194599813481430 ↗
73. Singh, A.K., Khanal, N., Chaulagain, R., Sharma, N., and Thieringer, F.M. (2023). Is the Pre-Shaping of an Orbital Implant on a Patient-Specific 3D-Printed Model Advantageous Compared to Conventional Free-Hand Shaping? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Clin. Med., 12.10.3390/jcm12103426 ↗
74. Orbital reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the role of patient-specific implants10.1007/s10006-022-01074-x ↗
75. Virtual Planning and 3D Printing in the Management of Acute Orbital Fractures and Post-Traumatic Deformities10.1055/s-0042-1754387 ↗
76. Qi, J., Yu, T., Hu, B., Wu, H., and Ouyang, H. (2021). Current biomaterial-based bone tissue engineering and translational medicine. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 22.10.3390/ijms221910233 ↗
77. Shi, J., Dai, W., Gupta, A., Zhang, B., Wu, Z., Zhang, Y., Pan, L., and Wang, L. (2022). Frontiers of Hydroxyapatite Composites in Bionic Bone Tissue Engineering. Materials, 15.10.3390/ma15238475 ↗
78. Niu, Y., Chen, L., and Wu, T. (2023). Recent Advances in Bioengineering Bone Revascularization Based on Composite Materials Comprising Hydroxyapatite. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 24.10.3390/ijms241512492 ↗
79. Interplay between mesenchymal stem cells and macrophages: Promoting bone tissue repair10.4252/wjsc.v16.i4.375 ↗
80. Bioactive Materials for Bone Regeneration: Biomolecules and Delivery Systems. ACS Biomaterials Science and Engineering10.1021/acsbiomaterials.3c00609 ↗
81. Anti-inflammatory and M2 macrophage polarization-promoting effect of mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes10.1016/j.intimp.2021.107823 ↗
82. New materials for hip and knee joint replacement: What’s hip and what’s in kneed?10.1002/jor.24750 ↗
83. Surface modification of biomaterials and biomedical devices using additive manufacturing10.1016/j.actbio.2017.11.003 ↗
84. Prasad, K., Bazaka, O., Chua, M., Rochford, M., Fedrick, L., Spoor, J., Symes, R., Tieppo, M., Collins, C., and Cao, A. (2017). Metallic biomaterials: Current challenges and opportunities. Materials, 10.10.3390/ma10080884 ↗
85. Cai, Z., Du, P., Li, K., Chen, L., and Xie, G. (2024). A Review of the Development of Titanium-Based and Magnesium-Based Metallic Glasses in the Field of Biomedical Materials. Materials, 17.10.3390/ma17184587 ↗
86. Long, S., Zhu, J., Jing, Y., He, S., Cheng, L., and Shi, Z. (2023). A Comprehensive Review of Surface Modification Techniques for Enhancing the Biocompatibility of 3D-Printed Titanium Implants. Coatings, 13.10.3390/coatings13111917 ↗
87. Vasile, V.A., Istrate, S., Cursaru, L.M., Piticescu, R.M., Ghita, A.M., Popescu, D.M., Garhöfer, G., Catrina, A.M., Spandole-Dinu, S., and Haidoiu, C. (2024). A New Approach for Orbital Wall Reconstruction in a Rabbit Animal Model Using a Hybrid Hydroxyapatite–Collagen-Based Implant. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 25.10.3390/ijms252312712 ↗
88. Abbreviated Key Title: Saudi Journal Oral Dental Research ISSN
89. Xia, Y., Chen, Z., Zheng, Z., Chen, H., and Chen, Y. (2024). Nanomaterial-integrated injectable hydrogels for craniofacial bone reconstruction. J. Nanobiotechnol., 22.10.1186/s12951-024-02801-0 ↗
90. Dec, P., Modrzejewski, A., and Pawlik, A. (2022). Existing and Novel Biomaterials for Bone Tissue Engineering. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 24.10.3390/ijms24010529 ↗
91. Kumar, M.S., Varma, P., and Kandasubramanian, B. (2024). From lab to life: Advances in in-situ bioprinting and bioink technology. Biomed. Mater., 20.10.1088/1748-605X/ad9dd0 ↗
92. Current state of fabrication technologies and materials for bone tissue engineering10.1016/j.actbio.2018.09.031 ↗
93. Fernandes, M., Vieira, M., Peixoto, D., and Alves, N.M. (2025). Nature-Based Hydrogels Combined with Nanoparticles for Bone Regeneration. J. Funct. Biomater., 16.10.3390/jfb16090317 ↗
94. Kim, Y., Lee, E.-J., Kotula, A.P., Takagi, S., Chow, L., and Alimperti, S. (2022). Engineering 3D Printed Scaffolds with Tunable Hydroxyapatite. J. Funct. Biomater., 13.10.3390/jfb13020034 ↗
95. In situ bioprinting: Intraoperative implementation of regenerative medicine10.1016/j.tibtech.2022.03.009 ↗