Author/Authors :
Manafi، Ali نويسنده Department of Plastic Surgery, Te-hran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; , , Emami، Abolhasan نويسنده Department of Plastic Surgery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; , , Vasei، Mohammad نويسنده , , Mosavi، Jaber نويسنده Department of Plastic Surgery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; , , Manafi، Amir نويسنده Medical Student, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran , , Hamedi، Zahra Sadat نويسنده Student Research Committee, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Teharn, Iran; , , Manafi، Farzad نويسنده Student Research Committee, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Teharn, Iran; , , Mehrabani، Golnoush نويسنده Stem Cell Research and Transgenic Technology Research Center, Student Research Committee, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran , , Manafi، Navid نويسنده Student Research Committee, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran ,
Abstract :
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.
