Publication:
Comparison of the biological activities of high-density porous polyethylene implants and oxidized regenerated cellulose-wrapped diced cartilage grafts

dc.contributor.buuauthorUysal, Afşin Ç.
dc.contributor.buuauthorÖzbek, Serhat
dc.contributor.buuauthorÖzcan, Mesut
dc.contributor.departmentTıp Fakültesi
dc.contributor.researcheridAAH-5441-2021
dc.contributor.scopusid7005410156
dc.contributor.scopusid7005245657
dc.contributor.scopusid7102067678
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-14T12:50:39Z
dc.date.available2021-09-14T12:50:39Z
dc.date.issued2003-08
dc.descriptionBu çalışma, 27-30 Eylül 2001 tarihleri arasında İstanbul'da düzenlenen 23. Ulusal Türk Plastik Cerrahi Derneği Kongresinde sözlü bildiri olarak sunulmuştur.
dc.description.abstractThe use of alloplastic materials in plastic surgery has become more extensive with advancement of autogenoustissue reconstruction techniques for the repair of defects, tissue augmentation, and the stabilization of bones. An ideal alloplastic material should be nonallergenic, noncarcinogenic, sterilizable, and easy to shape and should not cause rejection. Alloplastic material used for tissue augmentation should have a low rate of resorption and distortion. High-density porous polyethylene implants (Medpor) have been used widely and successfully for tissue augmentation. The Turkish Delight is a material composed of diced cartilage grafts wrapped in oxidized regenerated cellulose (Surgicel). Its indications are similar to those of the Medpor implant, and an additional donor site is usually not needed. Both materials are used in the same anatomical locations, especially for augmentation. Therefore, the authors evaluated the long-term stability of and suitable anatomical sites for these materials. Medpor implants or Turkish Delights were placed subperiosteally or subfascially in 10 young rabbits, and the resultant changes were evaluated 16 weeks after the operation by macroscopy and histopathology. Changes in projections were measured with an ocular micrometer. Medpor implants were neither resorbed nor distorted when placed subperiosteally or subfascially, and were highly stabilized by the surrounding tissues. Turkish Delight also enabled tissue augmentation, but had a significantly higher rate of resorption compared with the Medpor implant and was loosely bound to the surrounding tissue. The Turkish Delight was less resorbed and better fixed to adjacent tissues when placed subperiosteally than when placed subfascially.
dc.description.sponsorshipTurkish Soc Plast Surg
dc.identifier.citationUysal, A.Ç. vd. (2003). “Comparison of the biological activities of high-density porous polyethylene implants and oxidized regenerated cellulose-wrapped diced cartilage grafts”. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 112(2), 540-546.
dc.identifier.endpage546
dc.identifier.issn0032-1052
dc.identifier.issue2
dc.identifier.pubmed12900612
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-0042631383
dc.identifier.startpage540
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.PRS.0000070967.06488.63
dc.identifier.urihttps://journals.lww.com/plasreconsurg/Citation/2003/08000/Comparison_of_the_Biological_Activities_of.21.aspx
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11452/21952
dc.identifier.volume112
dc.identifier.wos000184532700021
dc.indexed.wosSCIE
dc.indexed.wosCPCIS
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkins
dc.relation.journalPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subjectSurgery
dc.subjectReconstruction
dc.subjectMedpor
dc.subjectAugmentation
dc.subjectBiomaterials
dc.subjectContour
dc.subjectBone
dc.subject.emtreeOxidized regenerated cellulose
dc.subject.emtreePolyethylene
dc.subject.emtreeAllograft
dc.subject.emtreeCartilage graft
dc.subject.emtreeDensity
dc.subject.emtreeDevice
dc.subject.emtreeDrug activity
dc.subject.emtreeEvaluation
dc.subject.emtreeFascia
dc.subject.emtreeGraft rejection
dc.subject.emtreeHistopathology
dc.subject.emtreeHuman
dc.subject.emtreeImplant
dc.subject.emtreeJoint stability
dc.subject.emtreeOcular micrometer
dc.subject.emtreeOrthopedic surgery
dc.subject.emtreeOsteolysis
dc.subject.emtreePlastic surgery
dc.subject.emtreePorosity
dc.subject.emtreePriority journal
dc.subject.emtreeProsthesis fixation
dc.subject.emtreeProsthesis material
dc.subject.emtreeRabbit
dc.subject.emtreeRetroperitoneum
dc.subject.emtreeSkin defect
dc.subject.emtreeSurgical technique
dc.subject.emtreeTissue reaction
dc.subject.meshAnimals
dc.subject.meshBiocompatible materials
dc.subject.meshCartilage
dc.subject.meshCellulose, oxidized
dc.subject.meshEar cartilages
dc.subject.meshImplants, experimental
dc.subject.meshMuscle, skeletal
dc.subject.meshPolyethylenes
dc.subject.meshRabbits
dc.subject.meshReconstructive surgical procedures
dc.subject.meshSkull
dc.subject.scopusNose Reconstruction; Costal Cartilage; Nasal Bone
dc.subject.wosSurgery
dc.titleComparison of the biological activities of high-density porous polyethylene implants and oxidized regenerated cellulose-wrapped diced cartilage grafts
dc.typeArticle
dc.typeProceedings Paper
dc.wos.quartileQ1
dspace.entity.typePublication
local.contributor.departmentTıp Fakültesi
local.indexed.atPubMed
local.indexed.atWOS

Files

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Placeholder
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: