Objective: To compare the motility of scleral-covered hydroxyapatite and alloplastic enucleation implants.
Design: Retrospective, nonrandomized comparative trial.
Participants: Measurements were obtained after surgery in 76 anophthalmic patients who had received either hydroxyapatite or alloplastic enucleation implants. METHODS/MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Horizontal and vertical excursions of the enucleation implants.
Results: There is no clinically important difference between the movement of hydroxyapatite and alloplastic enucleation implants. Implant movement appears to decline with advancing age.
Conclusion: Scleral-covered alloplastic and hydroxyapatite enucleation implants show similar movement. Although directly coupling hydroxyapatite implants to the prosthesis via the motility peg provides enhanced prosthetic movement, there appears to be no motility benefit of nonpegged hydroxyapatite over spherical alloplastic implants.