Cargando…

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

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Manafi, Ali, Sabet, Mohammad, Emami, Abolhasan, Vasei, Mohammad, Mosavi, Jaber, Manafi, Amir, Hamedi, Zahra Sadat, Manafi, Farzad, Mehrabani, Golnoush, Manafi, Navid
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Iranian Society for Plastic Surgeons 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4236984/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25489525
_version_ 1782345274175258624
author Manafi, Ali
Sabet, Mohammad
Emami, Abolhasan
Vasei, Mohammad
Mosavi, Jaber
Manafi, Amir
Hamedi, Zahra Sadat
Manafi, Farzad
Mehrabani, Golnoush
Manafi, Navid
author_facet Manafi, Ali
Sabet, Mohammad
Emami, Abolhasan
Vasei, Mohammad
Mosavi, Jaber
Manafi, Amir
Hamedi, Zahra Sadat
Manafi, Farzad
Mehrabani, Golnoush
Manafi, Navid
author_sort Manafi, Ali
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4236984
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Iranian Society for Plastic Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42369842014-12-08 A Comparasion in Graft Resorption between Three Techniques of Diced Cartilage Using Surgical Blade, Electrical Grinder and Grater in Rabbit Manafi, Ali Sabet, Mohammad Emami, Abolhasan Vasei, Mohammad Mosavi, Jaber Manafi, Amir Hamedi, Zahra Sadat Manafi, Farzad Mehrabani, Golnoush Manafi, Navid World J Plast Surg Original Article 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. Iranian Society for Plastic Surgeons 2014-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4236984/ /pubmed/25489525 Text en This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Manafi, Ali
Sabet, Mohammad
Emami, Abolhasan
Vasei, Mohammad
Mosavi, Jaber
Manafi, Amir
Hamedi, Zahra Sadat
Manafi, Farzad
Mehrabani, Golnoush
Manafi, Navid
A Comparasion in Graft Resorption between Three Techniques of Diced Cartilage Using Surgical Blade, Electrical Grinder and Grater in Rabbit
title A Comparasion in Graft Resorption between Three Techniques of Diced Cartilage Using Surgical Blade, Electrical Grinder and Grater in Rabbit
title_full A Comparasion in Graft Resorption between Three Techniques of Diced Cartilage Using Surgical Blade, Electrical Grinder and Grater in Rabbit
title_fullStr A Comparasion in Graft Resorption between Three Techniques of Diced Cartilage Using Surgical Blade, Electrical Grinder and Grater in Rabbit
title_full_unstemmed A Comparasion in Graft Resorption between Three Techniques of Diced Cartilage Using Surgical Blade, Electrical Grinder and Grater in Rabbit
title_short A Comparasion in Graft Resorption between Three Techniques of Diced Cartilage Using Surgical Blade, Electrical Grinder and Grater in Rabbit
title_sort comparasion in graft resorption between three techniques of diced cartilage using surgical blade, electrical grinder and grater in rabbit
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4236984/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25489525
work_keys_str_mv AT manafiali acomparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT sabetmohammad acomparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT emamiabolhasan acomparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT vaseimohammad acomparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT mosavijaber acomparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT manafiamir acomparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT hamedizahrasadat acomparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT manafifarzad acomparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT mehrabanigolnoush acomparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT manafinavid acomparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT manafiali comparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT sabetmohammad comparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT emamiabolhasan comparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT vaseimohammad comparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT mosavijaber comparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT manafiamir comparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT hamedizahrasadat comparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT manafifarzad comparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT mehrabanigolnoush comparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit
AT manafinavid comparasioningraftresorptionbetweenthreetechniquesofdicedcartilageusingsurgicalbladeelectricalgrinderandgraterinrabbit