To evaluate the histological and clinical properties of (1) subdermally implanted acellular dermal graft (AlloDerm) sheets vs intradermal bovine collagen and (2) subdermally or intradermally injected micronized AlloDerm vs type I bovine collagen crosslinked with glutaraldehyde (Zyplast).Patients: Twenty-five adult patients testing nonallergic to bovine collagen. Methods:(1) Stacked disks of AlloDerm were implanted subdermally behind one ear, and bovine collagen was injected intradermally behind the other. The soft tissue augmentation caused by the implants was measured by digital photography at 1, 4, and 12 weeks, and biopsy specimens of each implant type were examined at 3 months after implantation. (2) Micronized AlloDerm was injected intradermally and subdermally in 2 different locations behind one ear, and bovine collagen was injected in the same manner behind the other. The soft tissue augmentation caused by the implants was measured by digital photography at the time of implantation and at 1 and 4 weeks after implantation. All implants were examined 1 month after implantation.Results: All patients tolerated both implants well. (1) AlloDerm implants retained a higher percentage of the original implant volume than Zyplast at 1 and 3 months after implantation. Histologically, AlloDerm implants were extensively invaded by host fibroblasts without any foreign body reaction. (2) Intradermally injected micronized AlloDerm implants retained a higher percentage of the original implant volume at 1 month after implantation than intradermal Zyplast. Histologically, micronized AlloDerm implants were extensively invaded by host fibroblasts without any foreign body reaction. No significant differences were noted between subdermally injected micronized AlloDerm and Zyplast. Conclusions:The macroscopic and microscopic behavior of subdermally implanted AlloDerm sheets and subdermally and intradermally injected micronized Allo-Derm was compared with intradermally injected Zyplast. AlloDerm sheet volume persisted to a significantly (PϽ.001) greater degree than bovine collagen during the first 3 months after placement. Clinically, intradermally injected micronized AlloDerm volume persisted to a significantly (P=.01, .04, and .01, respectively) greater degree than intradermal Zyplast or subdermal micronized AlloDerm or Zyplast. Histologically, micronized Allo-Derm and AlloDerm are well tolerated at 1 and 3 months, respectively. Host tissue incorporation with fibroblast ingrowth and collagen deposition is seen in both materials. AlloDerm and micronized AlloDerm hold promise for use in facial soft tissue augmentation.

Radiotherapy is a simpler treatment modality with better patient compliance, and patients were much more likely to complete treatment than with corticosteroid injections. We believe that radiotherapy can play an important role in the prevention of earlobe keloid recurrences, and that with current techniques, complications can be minimized. Further randomized study with additional patients is needed to compare the effectiveness of corticosteroid injections and radiotherapy in preventing keloid recurrence.

The complex architecture of the auricle makes it one of the most challenging structures for the reconstructive surgeon to re-create. Overlying the ear's unique cartilage framework are layers of varied soft tissues forming a three-dimensional organ, which is distinctively positioned on the head. Arguably, the most challenging auricle to reconstruct is third-degree microtia due to a near-total absence of native tissue and a need for lifelong durability of the reconstruction. Many methods of reconstruction have been studied; autogenous costal cartilage reconstruction has been one of the more traditional methods, with favorable long-term results reported by several surgeons. However, this technique requires tremendous artistic and technical skill on the part of the surgeon-sculptor to construct a realistic-appearing ear. High-density porous polyethylene (Medpor) is a stable, alloplastic implant that can integrate with host tissues, is resistant to infection, and has been successfully applied to reconstruction of the head and neck. For auricular reconstruction, Medpor--enveloped in a temporoparietal fascial flap with full-thickness skin graft coverage--is a durable and aesthetically gratifying alternative in microtic patients. This alternative surgical technique reduces surgical time and morbidity, standardizes results among surgeons, and facilitates an aesthetic, natural-appearing reconstruction of the auricle.

Reconstruction in the head and neck is difficult and often requires complex solutions to restore functional and aesthetic form. While autogenous tissue is preferred, many alloplasts have been investigated. These materials, however, are foreign bodies, and most alloplasts tolerate exposure and infection poorly. An alloplast's in vivo behavior is a function not only of its composition but also of its form and macrostructure, as well as the interaction at the host-implant interface. Porous high-density polyethylene is well tolerated by surrounding tissue, and its porous core is rapidly infiltrated by host tissue. In order to further investigate the response of porous high-density polyethylene under adverse conditions, we implanted three porous high-density polyethylene disks and one silicone disk underneath the dorsal skin in each of 12 rats. The implants were exposed at differing times after implantation. After 7 days, the exposed areas were either skin grafted or allowed to close by secondary intention. Silicone implants all tolerated exposure poorly. Porous high-density polyethylene implants exposed soon after implantation also tolerated exposure poorly; however, none of these extruded. Porous high-density polyethylene implants exposed after the host tissue had invaded the pores tolerated exposure well, healing either by secondary intention or by skin grafting. Porous high-density polyethylene is a safe and reliable material for use in aesthetic and functional reconstruction of the head and neck. Porous high-density polyethylene and possibly other porous alloplasts tolerate exposure well once host fibrovascular tissue has invaded the implant pores. Further investigation of differing clinical settings and implant behavior is currently in progress.

In this article, options for nasal implantation during rhinoplasty are discussed. The range of implant options currently available to the nasal surgeon is considered in detail. Various types of autografts, homografts, and alloplasts commonly used in the nose are introduced and described. Indications for each nasal implant type are considered, as are the advantages and limitations of each option.

The major saddle nose deformity leaves a patient with an obvious aesthetic deficit as well as an equally disturbing functional handicap. Reconstructing the collapsed dorsum and tip and simultaneously restoring nasal function present a formidable challenge which has elicited a wide variety of solutions ranging from the use of a toothbrush handle to split calvarial grafting. As Murakami et al pointed out, the "variability exists to a large extent, because the saddle nose deformity is not a single entity but rather a spectrum of abnormalities." Attempts to categorize saddle nose deformities are useful; however, they often lack the simple impact and clarity of the pre-operative photograph. Moreover, the categorizations have not led to a uniform approach to this complicated problem. Nevertheless, Tardy's classification of minimal, moderate, and major saddle nose deformities provides a helpful framework for discussion of reconstructive options. Minimal deformities demonstrate a supratip depression of 1 to 2 mm and are easily corrected with cartilage or fascial overlays. Moderate saddle nose deformities are characterized by a significant loss of dorsal height as well as columellar retraction and broadening of the bony pyramid. A major deformity demonstrates "all of the stigmata of the moderately saddled nose, only to a more marked degree." In Tardy's opinion, an open approach may be warranted in these cases. We offer one solution to the major saddle nose deformity using a composite allo-implant of porous high-density polyethylene (PHDPE) (Medpor surgical implants, Porex Surgical, Inc., College Park, GA) and purified acellular human dermal graft (Alloderm, Life Cell Corp., TX.). While we readily admit that autogenous tissue is the preferred grafting material, we have encountered patients in whom this is not an option. Major saddle nose deformities typically require more augmentation than stacked septal or auricular cartilage can provide. Additionally, in patients seeking revision rhinoplasty, sufficient donor septal or auricular cartilage is often lacking. Resorption of irradiated cadaveric rib grafts has led us away from this material. Split calvarial bone grafts are our next recommendation for these patients; however, many patients refuse this option. In these patients we have turned to a composite allo-implant of PHDPE and acellular human dermal graft for reconstruction of the collapsed dorsum and tip.

No abstract

No abstract