Limits...
A Comparasion in Graft Resorption between Three Techniques of Diced Cartilage Using Surgical Blade, Electrical Grinder and Grater in Rabbit.

Manafi A, Sabet M, Emami A, Vasei M, Mosavi J, Manafi A, Hamedi ZS, Manafi F, Mehrabani G, Manafi N - World J Plast Surg (2014)

Bottom Line: There was no difference between the three methods in the 3 groups for graft resorption.There was no change in the volume, but the weight showed a decrease in the control group.As the histological results had no statistically difference between groups, we may recommend use of these two techniques in reconstructive and in aesthetic cases.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Plastic Surgery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran;

ABSTRACT

Background: In recent years, there is an increasing tendency to use diced cartilage grafts in rhinoplasty surgery for improving dorsum contour irregularities. This study was designed to compare graft resorption between three techniques of diced cartilage using surgical blade, electrical grinder and grater in rabbit model.

Methods: Thirteen New Zealand rabbits were divided into three groups. Three 2×2 cm cartilage specimens were harvested from one of their ears. In group one, the cartilage was diced by use of No:11 surgical blade to o.5 to 1 mm cube pieces. In group two, an electrical grinder was used and in group three, a grater was applied. The grafts were placed in three subcutaneous pockets in the back of rabbits and after 12 weeks, the implants were removed and their weight and volume were recorded and were evaluated by histological techniques.

Results: There was no difference between the three methods in the 3 groups for graft resorption. There was no change in the volume, but the weight showed a decrease in the control group.

Conclusions: As the histological results had no statistically difference between groups, we may recommend use of these two techniques in reconstructive and in aesthetic cases.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Harvesting the implants after 12 weeks
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4236984&req=5

Figure 8: Harvesting the implants after 12 weeks

Mentions: The skin was removed at the graft sites and under X4 loop magnification by use of No.15 surgical blade. The grafts were dissected and freed from adjacent surrounding tissues. Diced cartilage specimens were firmly adhered and their separation was not so simple to do (Figure 8). All grafts were weighted and their volumes were measured. The graft specimens were embedded in l0% formalin solution and send for histological evaluation. Three different staining were used for histological evaluation as follows:


A Comparasion in Graft Resorption between Three Techniques of Diced Cartilage Using Surgical Blade, Electrical Grinder and Grater in Rabbit.

Manafi A, Sabet M, Emami A, Vasei M, Mosavi J, Manafi A, Hamedi ZS, Manafi F, Mehrabani G, Manafi N - World J Plast Surg (2014)

Harvesting the implants after 12 weeks
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4236984&req=5

Figure 8: Harvesting the implants after 12 weeks
Mentions: The skin was removed at the graft sites and under X4 loop magnification by use of No.15 surgical blade. The grafts were dissected and freed from adjacent surrounding tissues. Diced cartilage specimens were firmly adhered and their separation was not so simple to do (Figure 8). All grafts were weighted and their volumes were measured. The graft specimens were embedded in l0% formalin solution and send for histological evaluation. Three different staining were used for histological evaluation as follows:

Bottom Line: There was no difference between the three methods in the 3 groups for graft resorption.There was no change in the volume, but the weight showed a decrease in the control group.As the histological results had no statistically difference between groups, we may recommend use of these two techniques in reconstructive and in aesthetic cases.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Plastic Surgery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran;

ABSTRACT

Background: In recent years, there is an increasing tendency to use diced cartilage grafts in rhinoplasty surgery for improving dorsum contour irregularities. This study was designed to compare graft resorption between three techniques of diced cartilage using surgical blade, electrical grinder and grater in rabbit model.

Methods: Thirteen New Zealand rabbits were divided into three groups. Three 2×2 cm cartilage specimens were harvested from one of their ears. In group one, the cartilage was diced by use of No:11 surgical blade to o.5 to 1 mm cube pieces. In group two, an electrical grinder was used and in group three, a grater was applied. The grafts were placed in three subcutaneous pockets in the back of rabbits and after 12 weeks, the implants were removed and their weight and volume were recorded and were evaluated by histological techniques.

Results: There was no difference between the three methods in the 3 groups for graft resorption. There was no change in the volume, but the weight showed a decrease in the control group.

Conclusions: As the histological results had no statistically difference between groups, we may recommend use of these two techniques in reconstructive and in aesthetic cases.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus