A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Customizable, biocompatible implants for dorsal nasal augmentation: An in vivo pilot study of eight polylactic acid scaffold designs. | LitMetric

Customizable, biocompatible implants for dorsal nasal augmentation: An in vivo pilot study of eight polylactic acid scaffold designs.

J Biomed Mater Res A

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laboratory of Bioregenerative Medicine and Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA.

Published: December 2024


Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Augmentation of the nasal dorsum often requires implantation of structural material. Existing methods include autologous, cadaveric or alloplastic materials and injectable hydrogels. Each of these options is associated with considerable limitations. There is an ongoing need for precise and versatile implants that produce long-lasting craniofacial augmentation. Four separate polylactic acid (PLA) dorsal nasal implant designs were 3D-printed. Two implants had internal PLA rebar of differing porosities and two were designed as "shells" of differing porosities. Shell designs were implanted without infill or with either minced or zested processed decellularized ovine cartilage infill to serve as a "biologic rebar", yielding eight total treatment groups. Scaffolds were implanted heterotopically on rat dorsa (N = 4 implants per rat) for explant after 3, 6, and 12 months followed by volumetric, histopathologic, and biomechanical analysis. Low porosity implants with either minced cartilage or PLA rebar infill had superior volume retention across all timepoints. Overall, histopathologic and immunohistochemical analysis showed a resolving inflammatory response with an M1/M2 ratio consistently favoring tissue regeneration over the study course. However, xenograft cartilage showed areas of degradation and pro-inflammatory infiltrate contributing to volume and contour loss over time. Biomechanical analysis revealed all constructs had equilibrium and instantaneous moduli higher than human septal cartilage controls. Biocompatible, degradable polymer implants can induce healthy neotissue ingrowth resulting in guided soft tissue augmentation and offer a simple, customizable and clinically-translatable alternative to existing craniofacial soft tissue augmentation materials. PLA-only implants may be superior to combination PLA and xenograft implants due to contour irregularities associated with cartilage degradation.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.37764DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

implants
8
dorsal nasal
8
polylactic acid
8
pla rebar
8
differing porosities
8
biomechanical analysis
8
soft tissue
8
tissue augmentation
8
augmentation
5
cartilage
5

Similar Publications