Publication:
Comparison of resorbable mesh (Poly L-lactide/Glycolic acid) and porous polyethylene in orbital floor fractures in an experimental model

dc.contributor.coauthorAral, Ali Mubin
dc.contributor.coauthorKaya, Basar
dc.contributor.coauthorCoskun, Neslihan
dc.contributor.coauthorOmeroglu, Suna
dc.contributor.coauthorKilic, Koray
dc.contributor.departmentKUH (Koç University Hospital)
dc.contributor.departmentSchool of Medicine
dc.contributor.kuauthorÖzmen, Selahattin
dc.contributor.kuauthorUygur, Halil Şafak
dc.contributor.schoolcollegeinstituteKUH (KOÇ UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL)
dc.contributor.schoolcollegeinstituteSCHOOL OF MEDICINE
dc.date.accessioned2024-11-09T23:03:52Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.description.abstractBackground: Resorbable mesh and porous polyethylene are frequently used alloplastic materials for the treatment of the orbital blowout fractures. The literature lacks reports comparing their long-term effects on experimental models. Objective: Our aim was to radiologically and histologically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of porous polyethylene and resorbable mesh in a rabbit orbital blowout fracture model. Methods: Twelve New Zealand white rabbits (24 orbits) were randomized to 4 groups. In group 1, only orbital floor dissection was done. In group 2, following orbital floor dissection, a 10-mm defect was created without any extra procedure. In group 3, following a 10-mm defect creation, a 12-mm-round cut porous polyethylene was placed on the defect. In group 4, following a 10-mm defect creation, a 12-mm-round cut resorbable mesh was placed on the defect. Computed tomographic analysis was performed during follow-up period. Orbital floors were evaluated histologically at month 6. Results: No clinical complications were observed during follow-up period. In radiological evaluation, there was no statistically significant difference between groups regarding bone formation. In histological evaluation, the connective tissue was denser, and organized and better bone formation was observed in group 3 and 4 when compared with other groups. Conclusion: Although no significant radiological changes were present, porous polyethylene and resorbable mesh performed better histologically. They were effective and well tolerated for reconstruction of the isolated orbital floor defects.
dc.description.indexedbyWOS
dc.description.indexedbyScopus
dc.description.indexedbyPubMed
dc.description.issue3
dc.description.openaccessYES
dc.description.publisherscopeInternational
dc.description.sponsoredbyTubitakEuN/A
dc.description.volume25
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/2292550317702370
dc.identifier.eissn2292-5511
dc.identifier.issn2292-5503
dc.identifier.quartileN/A
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85050952778
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1177/2292550317702370
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14288/8542
dc.identifier.wos411610500003
dc.keywordsBlowout fracture
dc.keywordsExperimental
dc.keywordsResorbable mesh
dc.keywordsPorous polyethylene
dc.keywordsTissue-response
dc.keywordsReconstruction
dc.keywordsBone
dc.keywordsImplants
dc.keywordsDefects
dc.keywordsTrauma
dc.keywordsRepair
dc.keywordsPlate
dc.keywordsDura
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherSage
dc.relation.ispartofPlastic Surgery
dc.subjectSurgery
dc.titleComparison of resorbable mesh (Poly L-lactide/Glycolic acid) and porous polyethylene in orbital floor fractures in an experimental model
dc.title.alternativeComparaison entre le treillis résorbable (Poly L-lactide et polyacide glycolique) et le polyéthylène poreux en cas de fracture du plancher orbital dans un modèle expérimental
dc.typeJournal Article
dspace.entity.typePublication
local.contributor.kuauthorÖzmen, Selahattin
local.contributor.kuauthorUygur, Halil Şafak
local.publication.orgunit1SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
local.publication.orgunit1KUH (KOÇ UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL)
local.publication.orgunit2KUH (Koç University Hospital)
local.publication.orgunit2School of Medicine
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublicationf91d21f0-6b13-46ce-939a-db68e4c8d2ab
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublicationd02929e1-2a70-44f0-ae17-7819f587bedd
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryf91d21f0-6b13-46ce-939a-db68e4c8d2ab
relation.isParentOrgUnitOfPublication055775c9-9efe-43ec-814f-f6d771fa6dee
relation.isParentOrgUnitOfPublication17f2dc8e-6e54-4fa8-b5e0-d6415123a93e
relation.isParentOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscovery055775c9-9efe-43ec-814f-f6d771fa6dee

Files