Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Proplast”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

248 records · Page 14Linked to original sources

Grafts and implants in nasal and chin augmentation. A rational approach to material selection.

Two major factors are involved in choosing augmentation materials: (1) the specific properties and limitations of the materials themselves (Table 2) and (2) the characteristics of the site for implantation. A wide variety of materials are currently available and these vary in density, ability to be sculpted, tissue reaction, resorption, migration, incidence of infection, extrusion rate, and ease of removal. Some of these characteristics are self-evident. For example, materials with high infection or extrusion rates (such as Silastic in nasal reconstruction) are clearly not useful in most instances. Likewise, materials that tend to migrate, such as tiny bits of cartilage, can lead to unacceptable results, but cartilage is such a generally good augmentation material in the nose that the measures to ensure stability are worth the additional time required for implantation. Resorption is a potential problem with all the biologic grafts and possibly with Supramid. Again, in certain situations in which alloplasts are unacceptable, such as infected areas, biologicals must be used and the consequences of resorption accepted. Density and ease of sculpting are often a matter of the surgeon's personal choice. As a general rule, bone is best replaced with firm materials and soft tissues are best augmented with soft materials. Should infection or rejection occur, the porous materials are much more difficult to remove; therefore, Silastic or a biological may be the best choice if there is any question about the presence of infection or possible future infection. The effect of the degree of tissue reaction is not well-understood. For example, Supramid elicits a marked tissue response but in general displays high compatibility with the tissues. Further investigation is needed to elucidate the role of tissue reactivity and porosity in the development of infection and extrusion. When choosing the implant material, the specific characteristics of the site for augmentation must be considered. A good example is the nose. Its mobility and thin soft-tissue coverage lead to extrusion of firm implants such as Silastic. By contrast, Silastic works well for chin augmentation. Also, consider present or future bacterial contamination in the area. This is especially important in nasal augmentation, where infection and extrusion can lead to unacceptable deformities. In general, nasal augmentation is best achieved in most circumstances by cartilage. If this is unavailable, then Supramid has a proven record for good tissue compatibility and resistance to infection. For the chin, Silastic (either rubber- or gel-filled prostheses) produces the most pleasing and long-lasting results.

Aluminum Oxide↗

Use of autograft and homograft TORP and PORP in the reconstruction of the conductive system in the middle ear.

The restoration of a functional transmission system of the middle ear is extremely difficult after a radical operation which leaves a large surgical cavity or in the absence of the tympanic membrane and ossicles, when the window and the tympanic ostium of the tube are covered with thick granulation and fibrous tissue. This article describes my experience in restoring the transmission system of the middle ear combining autograft and homograft with TORPs and PORPs.

Biocompatible Materials↗

[The PTFE plastic prosthesis as an arterial replacement: experiences over a 5-year period].

Unilateral iliac femoral reconstructions with PTFE are yielding good results-similar to those with Dacron, with patency rates of 75, 67, and 65% at 1, 2 and 3 years, respectively (Kaplan-Meier). PTFE has additional advantages compared with other materials: a) no need of preclotting; b) smooth inner surface-easy thrombectomy in case of thrombosis and c) good handling characteristics. In view of the above-mentioned facts PTFE can be recommended without restriction for unilateral pelvic reconstructions. The functional early results of bilateral aorto-femoral Goretex-Y bifurcation grafts in 50 cases after 2 years are encouraging. Long-term results are still pending. Reports of other groups using this material as aorto-bifemoral substitute are not yet available. The functional results with PTFE for femoro-popliteal grafts are not satisfactory: 35% after 2.5 years. Extra-anatomical bypasses yielded 70% one-year functioning rate. Especially the ring-or spiral-armoured PTFE grafts seem to be suitable for these reconstruction procedures.

Aged↗

Application of prosthetics to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and repair.

The evolution of synthetic materials to aid in the repair of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) instability is in an embryonic stage of development. After 12 years of animal and clinical trials, progress is emerging from synthetic augmentation rather than synthetic replacement. Synthetic materials are being given the strictest tests of purity, strength, and biologic tolerance by engineering and animal laboratories in preparation for controlled human trial.

Carbon↗

[The clinical applications of biomaterials].

The more and more availability of new alloplastic materials in oral and maxillo-facial reconstructions causes the necessity of judging if the biomaterials satisfy the surgical needs. The authors re-examine the main chemical, physical and biological characteristics of following materials: hydroxylapatite, polytetrafluoroethylene, polyglactin 910, polyfluorocarbons, polypropylene and report their experiences.

Biocompatible Materials↗

Callose synthesis in spirostanol treated carrot cells is not triggered by cytosolic calcium, cytosolic pH or membrane potential changes.

Carrot (Daucus carota L.) cell suspensions were treated with a spirostanol saponin from Yucca. This saponin is an elicitor of callose synthesis. Irrespectively of the mode of action of spirostanol on the callose synthase activity itself, the spirostanol-induced callose synthesis in carrot is not preceded by changes in membrane potential, cytosolic free calcium or cytosolic pH. The inability of modulators of cytosolic free calcium content (verapamil, nifedipine and Br-A23187), EGTA and a proton pump inhibitor (vandate) to inhibit or induce callose formation is consistent with a calcium- and pH-independent mechanism for callose deposition.

Calcium↗