Comparison of alloplastic implants for facial bones by scintigraphy and histology

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridCermik, Tevfik Fikret/0000-0001-7622-7277
dc.authorwosidCermik, Tevfik Fikret/A-9694-2018
dc.contributor.authorAygit, AC
dc.contributor.authorSarikaya, A
dc.contributor.authorCandan, L
dc.contributor.authorAyhan, MS
dc.contributor.authorÇermik, TF
dc.date.accessioned2024-06-12T11:03:28Z
dc.date.available2024-06-12T11:03:28Z
dc.date.issued1999
dc.departmentTrakya Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractReconstruction of bone defects and contour irregularities in the craniofacial region is difficult and often requires complex solutions. This study investigated the tissue response, vascularization and bone ingrowth, in hydroxyapatite, porous polyethylene and silicone elastomer when used as bone graft substitutes. 24 albino rabbits (8 rabbits for each implant) were used in this investigation. Hydroxyapatite 500 particles, silicone rubber and porous high-density polyethylene were placed in the cavities formed with a drill in the rabbit frontal bones. As a part of a prospective study the vascularization rates of all implant materials were analyzed 10 days and 2 months after surgery using (99m)Technetium-MDP (Methylene diphosphonate) scintigraphy of the skull. The scintigraphic studies were performed 2 hours after intravenous injection of 4 mCi (148 MBq) Tc-99m-MDP. The frontal bone was excised on the 10th and 60th days. All tissue specimens were placed first in 10% formalin and then in 10% nitric acid solution for decalcification. The vascularization, connective tissue ingrowth, foreign body reaction and bone regeneration around the implant were evaluated. Results of this study suggested that hydroxyapatite and porous polyethylene were stabilized in bone while as expected silicone was mobile, also hydroxyapatite implants are vascularized better and are more biocompatible than porous polyethylene.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s002380050158
dc.identifier.endpage106en_US
dc.identifier.issn0930-343X
dc.identifier.issue2-3en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-0032932024en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage102en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s002380050158
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14551/21675
dc.identifier.volume22en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000079990800012en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSpringer Verlagen_US
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Journal Of Plastic Surgeryen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectHydroxyapatiteen_US
dc.subjectPorous Polyethyleneen_US
dc.subjectSilicone Elastomeren_US
dc.subjectScintigraphyen_US
dc.subjectHydroxyapatite Ocular Implantsen_US
dc.subjectCoralline Hydroxyapatiteen_US
dc.subjectPorous Hydroxyapatiteen_US
dc.subjectVascularizationen_US
dc.subjectAugmentationen_US
dc.subjectCollagenen_US
dc.subjectOnlayen_US
dc.titleComparison of alloplastic implants for facial bones by scintigraphy and histologyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu