Khorasani, Mansour
(Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences)
,
Janbaz, Pejman
(Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences)
,
Rayati, Farshid
(Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences)
Objectives: The role of alloplastic materials in maxillofacial reconstruction is still controversial. Determining the utility of porous, high-density, polyethylene implants as a highly stable and flexible, porous alloplast, with properties such as rapid vascularization and tissue ingrowth, is crucia...
Objectives: The role of alloplastic materials in maxillofacial reconstruction is still controversial. Determining the utility of porous, high-density, polyethylene implants as a highly stable and flexible, porous alloplast, with properties such as rapid vascularization and tissue ingrowth, is crucial in cases of maxillofacial deformities and aesthetic surgery. Materials and Methods: Thirty high-density porous polyethylene implants were implanted in 16 patients that had been referred to a private office over a three-year period. These implants were used for correcting congenital deformities, posttraumatic defects and improving the aesthetic in nasal, paranasal, malar, chin, mandibular angle, body and orbital areas. Results: The outcomes of the cases in this study showed good aesthetic and functional results. The majority of patients had no signs of discomfort, rejection or exposure. Two implants suffered complications: a complicated malar implant was managed by antibiotic therapy, and an infected mandibular angle implant was removed despite antibiotic therapy. Conclusion: Based on the results, the Medpor implant seems to be an excellent biomaterial for correcting various facial deformities. Advantages include its versatility and relatively ideal pore size that allows for excellent soft tissue ingrowth and coverage. It is strong, flexible and easy to shape.
Objectives: The role of alloplastic materials in maxillofacial reconstruction is still controversial. Determining the utility of porous, high-density, polyethylene implants as a highly stable and flexible, porous alloplast, with properties such as rapid vascularization and tissue ingrowth, is crucial in cases of maxillofacial deformities and aesthetic surgery. Materials and Methods: Thirty high-density porous polyethylene implants were implanted in 16 patients that had been referred to a private office over a three-year period. These implants were used for correcting congenital deformities, posttraumatic defects and improving the aesthetic in nasal, paranasal, malar, chin, mandibular angle, body and orbital areas. Results: The outcomes of the cases in this study showed good aesthetic and functional results. The majority of patients had no signs of discomfort, rejection or exposure. Two implants suffered complications: a complicated malar implant was managed by antibiotic therapy, and an infected mandibular angle implant was removed despite antibiotic therapy. Conclusion: Based on the results, the Medpor implant seems to be an excellent biomaterial for correcting various facial deformities. Advantages include its versatility and relatively ideal pore size that allows for excellent soft tissue ingrowth and coverage. It is strong, flexible and easy to shape.
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
문제 정의
This report describes our experience with PHDPE implants (Medpor Biomaterial), an alloplastic implant material that may offer advantages when compared with previously used materials.
가설 설정
Preoperative view from below. B. Medpor implant reinforced with titanium mesh for lateral wall of the orbit. C.
Medpor implant reinforced with titanium mesh for lateral wall of the orbit. C. Medpor implant reinforced with titanium mesh for medial wall of the orbit. D.
제안 방법
Patients were recalled routinely after 1, 4, and 12 weeks for postoperative follow-up, and long term follow-up data were collected after 5 to 7 years. Patient satisfaction and objective criteria (asymmetry and displacement, postoperative complications and corrective surgery) were evaluated.
Patients were recalled routinely after 1, 4, and 12 weeks for postoperative follow-up, and long term follow-up data were collected after 5 to 7 years. Patient satisfaction and objective criteria (asymmetry and displacement, postoperative complications and corrective surgery) were evaluated.
대상 데이터
A 20-year-old woman with severe saddle nose deformity as well as malar and infraorbital rim depression. Initially, two “M” design malar implants were used to augment the malar area.
A 22-year-old woman with malar and paranasal deficiency. A “M” design malar implant and paranasal implant were used and fixed with screws.
A 30-year-old woman complaining of malar deficiency and poor facial contour in the mandibular angle and the lower and upper lip area. A “M” design malar implant was used for malar bone augmentation, and autologous fat was injected to refine the angle, ramus, and around the lips.
In this study, 16 patients with 30 Medpor implants were evaluated. We achieved good aesthetic and facial contour in all patients treated with PHDPE implants.
38, 26 and 21 patients, respectively, with orbital floor fractures were treated by porous polyethylene implants. The patients had problems such as enophthalmous, diplopia, limited extrinsic ocular motility, hypoglobus and impairment of the infraorbital nerve. They concluded that porous polyethylene sheets are safe, reliable and effective implants.
This study included 13 females and 3 males, and the mean age was 26.3±4.4 years.
성능/효과
7%). (Table 2) Implants were used for different sites of the maxillofacial region according to the following frequencies: malar (50.0%), orbital (10.0%), mandibular body and angle (13.3%), nasal (10.0%), paranasal (6.7%), and chin (10.0%).(Table 3) The mean follow-up was 5.
3) The mean follow-up was 5.4±0.62 years with complication and satisfaction rates of 12.5% and 87.5%, respectively.
Orbital defects in the medial and lateral wall were corrected by a Medpor implant reinforced with titanium mesh. After three months, the patient had no diplopia or enophthalmous.(Fig.
참고문헌 (44)
1 Rees TD Physical considerations for the aesthetic surgery of the neck and face Rees TD Aesthetic plastic surgery Philadelphia W.B. Saunders 1980 587
2 Maas CS Merwin GE Wilson J Frey MD Maves MD Comparison of biomaterials for facial bone augmentation Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1990 116 551 556 2158331
3 Wolfe SA Berkowitz S Plastic surgery of the facial skeleton Boston Little, Brown 1989 687
4 Spector M Harmon SL Kreutner A Characteristics of tissue growth into proplast and porous polyethylene implants in bone J Biomed Mater Res 1979 13 677 692 479215
5 Breadon GE Kern EB Neel HB 3rd Autografts of uncrushed and crushed bone and cartilage. Experimental observations and clinical implications Arch Otolaryngol 1979 105 75 80 367338
6 Gosain AK Plastic Surgery Eductional Foundation DATA Committee Biomaterials for reconstruction of the cranial vault Plast Reconstr Surg 2005 116 663 666 16079708
7 Wellisz T Lawrence M Jazayeri MA Golshani S Zhou ZY The effects of alloplastic implant onlays on bone in the rabbit mandible Plast Reconstr Surg 1995 96 957 963 7652071
8 Gui L Huang L Zhang Z Genioplasty and chin augmentation with Medpore implants: a report of 650 cases Aesthetic Plast Surg 2008 32 220 226 18158607
9 Rubin JP Yaremchuk MJ Complications and toxicities of implantable biomaterials used in facial reconstructive and aesthetic surgery: a comprehensive review of the literature Plast Reconstr Surg 1997 100 1336 1353 9326803
11 Shanbhag A Friedman HI Augustine J von Recum AF Evaluation of porous polyethylene for external ear reconstruction Ann Plast Surg 1990 24 32 39 2301880
14 Romano JJ Iliff NT Manson PN Use of Medpor porous polyethylene implants in 140 patients with facial fractures J Craniofac Surg 1993 4 142 147 8241356
18 Von Mangold H Correction of saddle nose by cartilage transplant Gesell Chir 1900 29 460 463
19 Brown JB Fryer MP Randall P Lu M Silicones in plastic surgery; laboratory and clinical investigations, a preliminary report Plast Reconstr Surg (1946) 1953 12 374 376 13111916
20 Niazi TN Coppens J Liu JK Couldwell WT Medpor implant in cranioorbitomaxillary reconstruction: institutional experience and a review of the literature J Oral Maxillofacial Surg 2008 7 444 448
21 Deshpande S Munoli A Long-term results of high-density porous polyethylene implants in facial skeletal augmentation: an Indian perspective Indian J Plast Surg 2010 43 34 39 20924447
22 Ram H Singh RK Mohammad S Gupta AK Efficacy of Iliac crest vs. Medpor in orbital floor reconstruction J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2010 9 134 141 22190772
25 Klawitter JJ Bagwell JG Weinstein AM Sauer BW An evaluation of bone growth into porous high density polyethylene J Biomed Mater Res 1976 10 311 323 1254618
26 Spector M Flemming WR Sauer BW Early tissue infiltrate in porous polyethylene implants into bone: a scanning electron microscope study J Biomed Mater Res 1975 9 537 542 1176523
27 Kim HS Park SS Kim MH Kim MS Kim SK Lee KC Problems associated with alloplastic materials in rhinoplasty Yonsei Med J 2014 55 1617 1623 25323900
28 Ridwan-Pramana A Wolff J Raziei A Ashton-James CE Forouzanfar T Porous polyethylene implants in facial reconstruction: outcome and complications J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2015 43 1330 1334 26276064
29 Niechajev I Facial reconstruction using porous high-density polyethylene (Medpor): long-term results Aesthetic Plast Surg 2012 36 917 927 22684610
30 Mohammadi S Mohseni M Eslami M Arabzadeh H Eslami M Use of porous high-density polyethylene grafts in open rhinoplasty: no infectious complication seen in spreader and dorsal grafts Head Face Med 2014 10 52 25534471
31 Baj A Spotti S Marelli S Beltramini GA Giannì AB Use of porous polyethylene for correcting defects of temporal region following transposition of temporalis myofascial flap Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2009 29 265 269 20162028
32 Rapidis AD Day TA The use of temporal polyethylene implant after temporalis myofascial flap transposition: clinical and radiographic results from its use in 21 patients J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006 64 12 22 16360852
33 Xu JJ Teng L Jin XL Ji Y Lu JJ Zhang B Porous polyethylene implants in orbital blow-out fractures and enophthalmos reconstruction J Craniofac Surg 2009 20 918 920 19480046
34 Tsouknidas A Maropoulos S Savvakis S Michailidis N FEM assisted evaluation of PMMA and Ti6Al4V as materials for cranioplasty resulting mechanical behaviour and the neurocranial protection Biomed Mater Eng 2011 21 139 147 22072078
35 Sun L Xiao J Lan Y Xiong Y Zhang L Zhou H [Reconstruction of the orbital fracture with enophthalmos using customized titanium mesh combined with Medpor] Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2015 33 272 275 Chinese 26281256
36 He D Li Z Shi W Sun Y Zhu H Lin M Orbitozygomatic fractures with enophthalmos: analysis of 64 cases treated late J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012 70 562 576 21752509
37 Yilmaz M Vayvada H Aydin E Menderes A Atabey A Repair of fractures of the orbital floor with porous polyethylene implants Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007 45 640 644 17681408
38 Lin IC Liao SL Lin LL Porous polyethylene implants in orbital floor reconstruction J Formos Med Assoc 2007 106 51 57 17282971
39 Cenzi R Farina A Zuccarino L Carinci F Clinical outcome of 285 Medpor grafts used for craniofacial reconstruction J Craniofac Surg 2005 16 526 530 16077294
41 Gosau M Schiel S Draenert GF Ihrler S Mast G Ehrenfeld M [Craniofacial augmentation with porous polyethylene implants (Medpor): first clinical results] Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir 2006 10 178 184 German 16685567
42 Menderes A Baytekin C Topcu A Yilmaz M Barutcu A Craniofacial reconstruction with high-density porous polyethylene implants J Craniofac Surg 2004 15 719 724 15346006
43 Romo T 3rd Litner JA Sclafani AP Management of the severe bulbous nasal tip using porous polyethylene alloimplants Facial Plast Surg 2003 19 341 348 14737703
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.