Perception of patient appearance following various methods of reconstruction after orbital exenteration

Abstract

This article compares the perception of health and beauty of patients after exenteration reconstruction with free flap, eyelid-sparing, split-thickness skin graft, or with a prosthesis. Cross-sectional evaluation was performed through a survey sent to all students enrolled at the University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine. The survey included inquiries about observer comfort, perceived patient health, difficulty of social interactions, and which patient appearance was least bothersome. Responses were scored from 0 to 4 for each method of reconstruction and an orbital prosthesis. A Friedman test was used to compare responses among each method of repair and the orbital prosthesis for each of the four questions, and if this was significant, then post-hoc pairwise comparison was performed with p values adjusted using Bonferroni’s method. One hundred and thirty two students responded to the survey and 125 completed all four questions. Favorable response for all questions was highest for the orbital prosthesis and lowest for the split-thickness skin graft. Patient appearance with an orbital prosthesis had significantly higher scores compared to patient appearance with each of the other methods for all questions (p value < 0.0001). Second highest scores were for the free flap, which were higher than eyelid-sparing and significantly higher compared to split-thickness skin grafting (p value: Question 1: < 0.0001; Question 2: 0.0005; Question 3: 0.006; and Question 4: 0.019). The orbital prosthesis was the preferred post-operative appearance for the exenterated socket for each question. Free flap was the preferred appearance for reconstruction without an orbital prosthesis. Split-thickness skin graft was least preferred for all questions.