May 2004
Volume 45, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2004
Motility Coupling Post Holding Strengths: Evaluating The Holding Strength Of Motility Coupling Posts Across Several MEDPOR® Ocular Implants
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • A.M. Noble
    Technology, Porex Surgical Inc, Newnan, GA
  • G. Swords
    Technology, Porex Surgical Inc, Newnan, GA
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  A.M. Noble, Porex Surgical Inc E; G. Swords, Porex Surgical Inc E.
  • Footnotes
    Support  none
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2004, Vol.45, 4701. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      A.M. Noble, G. Swords; Motility Coupling Post Holding Strengths: Evaluating The Holding Strength Of Motility Coupling Posts Across Several MEDPOR® Ocular Implants . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2004;45(13):4701.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Abstract: : Purpose:To evaluate the hold strength of the Motility Coupling Post (MCP), and the Magnetic Motility Coupling System (MMCS) in various porous polyethylene ocular implant designs. The MCP is a screw that mechanically couples an ocular prosthesis to an ocular implant. The MMCS drives the prosthesis by magnetic attraction to the implant. We evaluated the MCP and MMCS in conjunction with four different MEDPOR Ocular Implants. Methods:The MCP and the MMCS tested were installed in the following MEDPOR 20mm spherical ocular implants: The Standard Sphere, Smooth Surface Tunnel (SST), MEDPOR PLUSTM, and the MEDPOR PLUS SST. Ten samples of each implant were prepared using the recommended procedure. All implants and the motility screws were securely held in a Q–Test tensile tester with a 100–pound scale set to a pull rate of 0.50" per minute, the units are in pounds and the test was Peak Load. Since the MCP system with the Standard Sphere has shown favorable clinical results, this configuration is used as the control in this study. The resulting values for the various products are as follows: MCP and Standard Sphere (mean = 12.98, SD = 4.42), MCP + SST Sphere (mean = 29.65, SD = 4.70), MCP and MEDPOR PLUS (mean = 10.28, SD = 3.70), MCP and MEDPOR PLUS SST (mean = 17.16, SD = 2.450), MMCS and Standard Sphere (mean = 27.92, SD = 8.37) MMCS and SST (mean = 48.64, SD = 6.13) MMCS and MEDPOR PLUS (mean = 21.06, SD = 4.34) MMCS and SST MEDPOR PLUS (mean = 41.62, SD = 5.20). Results:A positive correlation was found in all samples except the MCP and MEDPOR PLUS configuration, this configuration while less than statistically significant to the control still measured no less than 6 lbs of holding force, more than sufficient for the application. The P values for the above tests are as follows: MCP and SST Sphere (p = .0001) MCP and MEDPOR PLUS Sphere (p = .1717), MCP and MEDPOR PLUS SST Sphere (p = .0401), MMCS and Sphere (p = .0013) MMCS and SST Sphere (p = .0001), MMCS and MEDPOR PLUS Sphere (p = .0023), MMCS and SST MEDPOR PLUS Sphere (p = .0001). Conclusion:The confluence of data indicates that the holding force of all the tested motility configurations will effectively secure the motility screws in MEDPOR ocular Implants.

Keywords: motion–D • eye movements • face perception 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×