The unique and complex anatomy of the orbit requires significant contouring of the implants to restore the proper anatomy. Fractures of the orbital region have an incidence of 10-25% from the total facial fractures and the most common age group was the third decade of life. The majority of cases required reconstruction of the orbital floor to support the globe position and restore the shape of the orbit. The reason for this was that the bony walls were comminuted and/ or bone fragments were missing. Therefore, the reconstruction of the missing bone was important rather than reducing the bone fragments. This could be accomplished by using various materials. There is hardly any anatomic region in the human body that is so controversial in terms of appropriate material used for fracture repair: non resorbable versus resorbable, autogenous/ allogeneic/ xenogenous versus alloplastic material, non-prebent versus preformed (anatomical) plates, standard versus custom-made plates, nonporous versus porous material, non-coated versus coated plates. Thus, the importance of the material used for reconstruction becomes more challenging for the ophthalmologist and the oral and maxillofacial surgeon.