Histologic study of gore‐tex removed after rhinoplasty

Jang, Tae Young; Choi, Ji Yun; Jung, Dong Hak; Park, Hyojin; Lim, Sung Chul

doi:10.1002/lary.20158

Cited by 22 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Implants made of ePTFE are more widely accepted by rhinoplastic surgeons, but recent histologic studies have suggested that ePTFE may elicit greater foreign body reactions than previously suspected. 3 It also remains unknown whether complications are more common when ePTFE is used simultaneously with pHDPE. A recent meta-analysis of available alloplasts concluded that improved reporting of adverse outcomes is necessary before any firm conclusions can be made regarding safety and efficacy.…”

Section: Hile Autologousmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complications Associated With Alloplastic Implants in Rhinoplasty

Winkler¹,

Soler²,

Leong³

et al. 2012

Arch Facial Plast Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the incidence of infection and extrusion of porous high-density polyethylene (pHDPE) and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) implants used in rhinoplasty at a high-volume, academic facial plastic surgery practice.Methods: A total of 662 rhinoplasty procedures performed by 3 faculty surgeons from 1999 to 2008 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, operative details, and postoperative course findings were collected from patient records.Results: The incidence of postoperative infection was 2.8% (19 of 662 patients). In each case of infection, alloplastic material had been used. Infections occurred in 1 in 5 rhinoplasty procedures in which pHDPE implants were used. In patients in whom ePTFE was used alone, the infection rate was 5.3%. Exposure developed in 12% of patients in whom an alloplast was used during surgery. Factors notably not associated with infection on bivariate analysis included sex, surgeon, purpose of procedure (functional vs cosmetic), current tobacco use, or history of cocaine use (P Ͼ .05 for all).Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study represents the largest evaluation of the use of pHDPE implants in rhinoplasty to date. Our findings are in contrast to those of previous studies regarding the use of pHDPE in rhinoplasty and parallel to those regarding the use of ePTFE. Caution is strongly recommended when considering the use of pHDPE in rhinoplasty.

show abstract

Section: Hile Autologousmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complications Associated With Alloplastic Implants in Rhinoplasty

Winkler¹,

Soler²,

Leong³

et al. 2012

Arch Facial Plast Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this study, 77% of all capsular contracture cases were related to the usage of silicone implants. Calcinosis of both type of implants has also been reported, however the data are very limited [29,30]. This study did not compare these complications due to their rarity and low reporting rate.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

A systematic review of complications associated with nasal augmentation implants: expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex) versus silicone

Hoang¹,

Januszyk

Boyd

2018

J Cosmet Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Augmentation rhinoplasty has been one of the most common cosmetic procedures in Asian population. Silicone is the most widely used nasal augmentation material in Asia. However, in the past few decades, expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE, Gore-tex ® ) has become more popular as an alternative.Objective: In this study, complications associated with each implant aresystematically reviewed. Methods: Heuristic searches of MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were performed using the keywords "ePTFE", "Goretex", "silicone", and "rhinoplasty" to identify manuscripts for inclusion. The reference lists of these articles were systematically reviewed to further identify relevant articles. Only studies with detailed complication reports (i.e., infection, malposition) were considered. Random effects meta-analysis was performed to calculate the significance of differences in complication rates between silicone and ePTFE.Results: Eighteen studies encompassing a total of 7,759 patients were analyzed, 12 with ePTFE and 6 with silicone. Among studies in which sex was reported, 88.8% of the patients were female. 88.4% of cases in the silicone group were primary, as compared to 78% in the ePTFE group. Overall complications were 5.3% for the ePTFE group and 9.2% for silicone (p<0.05). Infection rate was similar between the two groups, 1.4% for ePTFE versus 1.9% for silicone group (p>0.05). Exposure rate was also similar, 0.7% for silicone and 1.2% for ePTFE (p>0.05). Malposition rates were significantly lower in ePTFE group compared to those receiving silicone implants (2.4% versus 6.8%, p<0.05). Conclusion:Although the gold standard graft material for rhinoplasty remains autologous tissue, implant based rhinoplasty is far more common in Asian populations. Both silicone and ePTFE have acceptable risk profiles when used in selective patients for dorsal augmentation. However, given the additional risks of capsular contracture and implant malposition associated with silicone implants, ePTFE should be considered as a first-line option for implant-based nasal augmentation.

show abstract

“…Informed consent was obtained. The plastic surgeon removed the Gore-Tex material [1][2][3], and sent it for histologic examination. Our H&E staining was performed as previously described [4].…”

Section: Sirmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gore-Tex is known to be a safe implant material [1][2][3]. However, its use may lead to clinical problems.…”

Section: Sirmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gore-Tex was commonly used in the 1990s for a few esthetic surgeries, including lip augmentation. Gore-Tex has also been used in other procedures including rhinophasty; laryngoplasty; artificial tracheal implants; tendon, vascular and heart valve reconstructions; cardiac bypass grafts; aorticpulmonary shunts; mandibular augmentation and periodontal procedures [1][2][3].…”

Section: Sirmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation