Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Bone augmentation of the osteo-odonto alveolar lamina in MOOKP—will it delay laminar resorption?

  • Cornea
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

We aimed to describe a new technique and analyse the early outcomes of augmenting the canine tooth using a mandibular bone graft in an attempt to delay or retard the process of laminar resorption following the modified osteo odonto keratoprosthesis (MOOKP) procedure.

Design

This was a retrospective case series.

Patients and methods

Eyes that underwent the bone augmentation procedure between December 2012 and February 2014 were retrospectively analysed. The procedure, performed by the oromaxillofacial surgeon, involved securing a mandibular bone graft beneath the periosteum on the labial aspect of the canine tooth chosen to be harvested for the MOOKP procedure. This procedure was performed simultaneously with the Stage 1 A of the MOOKP. Three months later, the tooth was harvested and fashioned into the osteo-odonto alveolar lamina similar to the method described in the Rome–Vienna Protocol.

Results

The bone augmentation procedure was performed in 11 eyes (five SJS/ six chemical injuries). The mean follow-up after Stage 2 of MOOKP procedure in these eyes was 7.45 months (2 to 20 months). Complications noted were peripheral laminar exposure (three eyes—SJS) and bone graft exposure and necrosis in the mouth (nine—SJS). No evidence of clinical laminar resorption was noted in any of the eyes.

Conclusion

Laminar resorption in MOOKP can lead to vision and globe threatening complications due to the consequent cylinder instability and chances of extrusion. Augmenting the bone on the labial aspect of the canine tooth might have a role to play in delaying or preventing laminar resorption.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tan A, Tan DT, Tan XW, Mehta JS (2012) Osteo-odonto keratoprosthesis: systematic review of surgical outcomes and complication rates. Ocul Surf 10(1):15–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Stoiber J, Csáky D, Schedle A, Ruckhofer J, Grabner G (2002) Histopathologic findings in explanted osteo-odontokeratoprosthesis. Cornea 21(4):400–404

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sipkova Z, Lam FC, Francis I, Herold J, Liu C (2013) Serial 3-dimensional computed tomography and a novel method of volumetric analysis for the evaluation of the osteo-odonto-keratoprosthesis. Cornea 32(4):401–406

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Stoiber J, Forstner R, Csáky D, Ruckhofer J, Grabner G (2003) Evaluation of bone reduction in osteo-odontokeratoprosthesis (OOKP) by three-dimensional computed tomography. Cornea 22(2):126–130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Iyer G, Srinivasan B, Agarwal S, Rachapalle SR (2014) Laminar resorption in modified osteo-odonto-keratoprosthesis procedure: a cause for concern. Am J Ophthalmol 158(2):263–269

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Iyer G, Srinivasan B, Agarwal S, Shanmugasundaram S, Rajan G (2014) Structural & functional rehabilitation in eyes with lamina resorption following MOOKP–can the lamina be salvaged? Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 252(5):781–790

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Falcinelli G, Falsini B, Taloni M et al (2005) Modified osteo-odontokeratoprosthesis for treatment of corneal blindness: long-termanatomical and functional outcomes in 181 cases. Arch Ophthalmol 123:1319–1329

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hille K, Grabner G, Liu C, Colliardo P, Falcinelli G, Taloni M, Falcinelli G (2005) Standards for modified osteoodontokeratoprosthesis (OOKP) surgery according to Strampelli and Falcinelli: the Rome-Vienna Protocol. Cornea 24(8):895–908

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Iyer G, Pillai VS, Srinivasan B et al (2010) Modified osteo-odonto keratoprosthesis - the Indian experience - results of the first 50 cases. Cornea 29:771–776

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Liu C, Okera S, Tandon R et al (2008) Visual rehabilitation in end-stage inflammatory ocular surface disease with the osteo-odontokeratoprosthesis: results from the UK. Br J Ophthalmol 92:1211–1217

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. De La Paz MF, De Toledo JA, Charoenrook V et al (2011) Impact of clinical factors on the long-term functional and anatomic outcomes of osteoodonto- keratoprosthesis and tibial bone keratoprosthesis. Am J Ophthalmol 151:829–839

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Misch CM (2000) Use of the mandibular ramus as a donor site for onlay bone grafting. J Oral Implantol 26(1):42–49

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have NO affiliation with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CJ Shah Cornea Services/Dr G Sitalakshmi Memorial Clinic for Ocular Surface Disorders, Medical Research Foundation, Sankara Nethralaya, 18 College Road, Chennai, 600006, Tamil Nadu, India

    Geetha Iyer, Bhaskar Srinivasan, Shweta Agarwal, Ekta Rishi & Pukhraj Rishi

  2. Rajan Dental Institute, 56, Dr RadhakrishnanSalai, Mylapore, Chennai, 600004, Tamil Nadu, India

    Gunaseelan Rajan & Shanmugasundaram Shanmugasundaram

  3. Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, SRM Dental College, Bharathi Salai, Ramapuram, Chennai, 600089, Tamil Nadu, India

    Shanmugasundaram Shanmugasundaram

Authors
  1. Geetha Iyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bhaskar Srinivasan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shweta Agarwal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ekta Rishi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Pukhraj Rishi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Gunaseelan Rajan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Shanmugasundaram Shanmugasundaram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Geetha Iyer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Iyer, G., Srinivasan, B., Agarwal, S. et al. Bone augmentation of the osteo-odonto alveolar lamina in MOOKP—will it delay laminar resorption?. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 253, 1137–1141 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-3055-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-3055-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation