Plastic Surgery & Cosmetic Surgery in Dallas


 
Dr. Lam has been featured on

Email Us:












E-mail this page to a friend
 
Your friend's e-mail:
Your Name:
Your e-mail:
Message
 

Call us:

888.866.3388
972.312.8188

Click to Call:

Your Phone Number

Edit

Call me

CALL

Visit Us:

6101 Chapel Hill Blvd., Ste 101
Plano, Texas 75093
Map & Directions

Get to-and-from directions
Powered by Google Maps

Search Our Site
View our current events
October 2008
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
Week 40 1 2 3 4
Week 41 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Week 42 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Week 43 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Week 44 26 27 28 29 30 31
Take our survey
What is the second most important part of your face to rejuvenate?
Advertisement

Tissue response to expanded polytetrafluoroethylene and silicone implants in a rabbit model.

Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2002 Apr-Jun;4(2):111-3.

Tissue response to expanded polytetrafluoroethylene and silicone implants in a rabbit model.

Batniji RK, Hutchison JL, Dahiya R, Lam SM, Williams EF 3rd.
Division of Otolaryngology, Albany Medical Center, 47 New Scotland Ave, Albany, NY 12208, USA.

BACKGROUND: Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) and silicone are safe and relatively biocompatible materials. OBJECTIVE: To compare, using multiple histologic parameters, the tissue response to a standard silicone soft tissue implant with the response to a modified ePTFE implant. The modified form of ePTFE is reinforced with fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEPRePTFE), which provides increased pliability and material integrity. METHODS: The implants were placed into a subperiosteal pocket over the skull of adult New Zealand white rabbits. At 7, 30, and 90 days after implantation, en bloc tissue specimens, including skin, implants, surrounding soft tissue, and underlying bone were harvested for gross and histologic evaluation. OUTCOME MEASURES: The tissue response to the implants was assessed with respect to the number of foreign body giant cells present, the thickness of the fibrous capsule, and the general inflammatory response (n = 6 for each implant at each evaluation period). RESULTS: There were no cases of rejection, extrusion, or infection. The silicone implants elicited a significantly thicker capsule and less neovascularization (P<.05). CONCLUSION: The FEPRePTFE demonstrated a favorable tissue response when compared with silicone, particularly in regard to capsule thickness and vascular ingrowth.
PMID: 12020206 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

 
Choose a Language

DISCLAIMER

Call 972-312-8188 or 888-866-3388 for your appointment today, or email info@lamfacialplastics.com for more information.

 


SAMUEL M. LAM, M.D., F.A.C.S.
DIPLOMATE, AMERICAN BOARD OF FACIAL PLASTIC & RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY DIPLOMATE, AMERICAN BOARD OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY • HEAD & NECK SURGERY • DIPLOMATE, AMERICAN BOARD OF HAIR RESTORATION SURGERY • FELLOW, AMERICAN ACADEMY OF FACIAL PLASTIC & RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY • FELLOW, AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS ,


Website designed by PCMG