The Comparison of Survival of Diced, Crushed, and Block Ear Cartilage Grafts in Rabbit

Document Type : Original Article (s)

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Pathology and Stem Cell Research Center, Afzalipour School of Medicine, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

2 Resident, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Surgery and Liver Transplant, School of Medicine, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

4 Professor, Department of Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran

5 General Practitioner, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

Abstract

Background: Cartilage grafts are used in plastic surgery in restorations that require strength. Due to varying degrees of strength in these regenerations, cartilage grafts from different sources are used in block, crushed, and diced forms. The aim of this study was to compare the survival rate of in crushed, diced, and block autograft cartilage forms of rabbit ear.Methods: This study was performed on 36 New Zealand white male rabbits weighing 2000 to 2500 grams and aged 12 to 16 weeks. The cartilage of the right ear of each rabbit was harvested, and three graft samples of crushed, diced, and block forms were obtained. The grafts were put in three separate subcutaneous envelopes adjacent to the rabbit’s backbone. After 3 months, the specimens were removed, stained with hematoxylin and eosinophil (H & E), and histologically examined.Findings: The mean graft weight increased in all groups using crushed, diced, and block cartilage forms, but it was not statistically significant. There was a significant difference between the different methods in terms of the amount of fibrosis (P = 0.002), ossification (P < 0.001), and chondrocyte (P = 0.002); so that the percentage of the live chondrocytes was significantly higher in the block group.Conclusion: Results show that block cartilage grafts are more reliable than diced and crushed types in the formation of various facial and nasal regions.

Keywords

References

  1. Neligan PC. Plastic surgery. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2013. vol 1.
  2. Mathes SJ, Hentz VR. Plastic surgery. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders Elsevier; 2006. vol 1. p. 617.
  3. Sheen JH. Spreader graft: A method of reconstructing the roof of the middle nasal vault following rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 1984; 73(2): 230-9.
  4. Rudderman RH, Guyuron B, Mendelsohn G. The fate of fresh and preserved, noncrushed and crushed autogenous cartilage in the rabbit model. Ann Plast Surg 1994; 32(3): 250-4.
  5. Kelly MH, Bulstrode NW, Waterhouse N. Versatility of diced cartilage-fascia grafts in dorsal nasal augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007; 120(6): 1654-9.
  6. Moss MI, Moss- Salentijn L. Vertebrate cartilages. In Hall BK, editors. Cartilages: Structure, function and biochemistry. New York, NY: Academic Press, 1983. p. 1-30.
  7. Mankin HJ. The response of articular cartilage to mechanical injury. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1982; 64(3): 460-6.
  8. Hunziker EB. Growth-factor-induced healing of partial-thickness defects in adult articular cartilage. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2001; 9(1): 22-32.
  9. Daniel RK, Calvert JW. Diced cartilage grafts in rhinoplasty surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 113(7): 2156-71.
  10. Shahrokh S, Emami S A, Fatemi M J, Pedram M S, Mohajeri S F, Mousavi S J, et al . The comparison between the absorption rate of rib cartilage graft with conchal cartilage graft in rabbit. Tehran Univ Med J 2017; 75(1): 17-23. [In Persian].
  11. Hafezi F, Abbaszadeh A, Fatemi MJ, Hossaini SA, Mousavi SJ, Ezadi S, et al. A Comparison between the absorption rate of unwrapped and wrapped diced cartilage in rabbit. Iran J Surg 2014; 22(1): 19-27. [In Persian].
  12. Fatemi MJ, Hasani ME, Rahimian S, Bateni H, Pedram M, Mousavi SJ. Survival of block and fascial-wrapped diced cartilage grafts: An experimental study in rabbits. Ann Plast Surg 2012; 69(3): 326-30.
  13. Cakmak O, Bircan S, Buyuklu F, Tuncer I, Dal T, Ozluoglu LN. Viability of crushed and diced cartilage grafts: A study in rabbits. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2005; 7(1): 21-6.
  14. Yilmaz S, Ercocen AR, Can Z, Yenidunya S, Edali N, Yormuk E. Viability of diced, crushed cartilage grafts and the effects of Surgicel (oxidized regenerated cellulose) on cartilage grafts. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 108(4): 1054-60.
  15. Hizal E, Buyuklu F, Ozer O, Cakmak O. Effects of different levels of crushing on the viability of rabbit costal and nasal septal cartilages. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 128(5): 1045-51.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 37, Issue 520 - Serial Number 520
January and February 2019
Pages 249-255

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 07 April 2019
  • Revise Date: 28 April 2024
  • Accept Date: 06 April 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics