## 3 Results  
The study included 90 patients aged 41.4 \(\pm\) 16.2 years (mean \(\pm\) SD). The comparative analysis was performed on 33 patients who underwent orbital wall reconstruction using 3D-printed customized orbital implant templates and 57 controls who underwent the reconstruction using conventional implant methods. The baseline characteristics and demographic data of the patients are listed in Table 1. There were no intergroup differences in age, sex, operation time, fracture site, defect size, or pre- and postoperative exophthal-mometry. In the 3D group, seven of the thirty-three patients complained of diplopia before surgery, while only two complained of diplopia after surgery. In the manual group, eleven of the fifty-seven patients complained of diplopia before surgery, while five complained of diplopia after surgery. In the 3D group, five of the thirty-three patients complained of paresthesia in the injured area before surgery, while four complained of paresthesia after surgery. In the manual group, ten of the fifty-seven patients complained of paresthesia in the injured area before surgery, while seven complained of paresthesia after surgery. The mean volumes of the contralateral unaffected side, and pre- and postoperative injured sides were 22.5 \(\pm\) 2.9, 23.7 \(\pm\) 3.0, and 22.3 \(\pm\) 2.8 cm\({}^{3}\), respectively, in the 3D group, and 21.6 \(\pm\) 2.5, 22.7 \(\pm\) 2.8, and 21.2 \(\pm\) 2.7 cm\({}^{3}\) in the manual group. The pre- and postoperative VD were 1.1 \(\pm\) 1.2 and \(-\)0.2 \(\pm\) 0.8 cm\({}^{3}\), respectively, in the 3D group, and \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline
**Characteristic** & **3D Group** & **Manual Group** & \(p\) \\ \hline
**Number of patients** & 33 & 57 & \\
**Age, years** & 42.0 \(\pm\) 16.5 & 36.2 \(\pm\) 15.8 & 0.676  \\
**See, male/female** & 22/1 & 47/10 & 0.383  \\
**Side, right/left** & 17/16 & 22/35 & 0.414  \\
**Cause of injury** & & & \\ Fall & 0 & 1 & \\ Assault & 13 & 9 & \\ Accidental bump & 18 & 46 & \\ Traffic collision & 2 & 1 & \\
**Fracture site** & & & \\ Inferior wall & 14 (42.4) & 23 (40.4) & \\ Medial wall & 12 (36.3) & 22 (38.6) & \\ Inferiomedial and wall & 7 (21.2) & 12 (21.1) & \\
**Defect size, cm\({}^{2}\)** & 4.53 & 4.75 & 0.459  \\
**Operation time, minutes** & 61.1 \(\pm\) 20.5 & 59.3 \(\pm\) 18.5 & 0.881  \\
**Exophilaminometry** & & & \\ Contralateral unaffected eye & 13.7 \(\pm\) 3.0 & 13.7 \(\pm\) 2.3 & 0.546  \\ Injured eye, properation & 13.1 \(\pm\) 2.9 & 13.2 \(\pm\) 2.4 & 0.525  \\
**Injured eye, postoperation** & 14.0 \(\pm\) 2.5 & 14.1 \(\pm\) 2.4 & 0.635  \\
**Preoperative symptoms** & & & \\ Diplopia & 7 (21.15) & 11 (19.3) & 0.956  \\
**Paresthesia** & 5 (15.1\%) & 10 (17.5) & 0.769  \\
**Postoperative symptoms** & & & \\ Diplopia & 2 (6.0) & 5 (8.8) & 0.643  \\
**Paresthesia** & 4 (12.1) & 7 (12.3) & 0.982  \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Characteristics of the study groups Data are mean \(\pm\) SD or n (%) values. 1.2 \(\pm\) 0.9 and \(-\)0.3 \(\pm\) 0.9 cm\({}^{3}\) in the manual group. No variable was significantly different between these two groups (Table 2). The volumes on the preoperative lesion side were significantly larger than those on the contralateral unaffected or postoperative injured sides within each group. The volumes on the postoperative injured side did not differ significantly from those on the unaffected contralateral side in 3D group, but they did differ significantly from those on the unaffected contralateral side in the manual group (Table 3). We also found a positive association between pre- and postoperative VDs in the manual group (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.548, \(p\) = 0.001) (Figure 4). In accordance with an increase in preoperative VD, the postoperative VD worsened in the manual group, whereas there was no association between them in the 3D group. Figure 4: Correlation between pre- and postoperative VDs. (**A**) There was no association between pre- and postoperative VDs in the 3D group.