Implantes de polietileno gel e poroso em cavidade anoftálmica de coelhos
Carregando...
Data
2006-06-01
Autores
Ferraz, Lucieni Cristina Barbarini [UNESP]
Schellini, Silvana Artioli [UNESP]
Wludarski, Sheila Lordelo
Padovani, Carlos Roberto [UNESP]
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia
Resumo
OBJETIVO: Comparar implantes de polietileno poroso no estado sólido e gel em cavidades enucleadas. MÉTODOS: Trinta e seis coelhos albinos foram submetidos à enucleação do olho direito, recebendo esferas de polietileno poroso (18 animais) ou gel (18 animais), de 12 mm de diâmetro. Os animais foram avaliados semanalmente por exame clínico e mensalmente por ultra-sonografia modo B, realizada 30, 60 e 90 dias após a cirurgia, tendo sido os animais sacrificados aos 90 dias. Após o sacrifício, o conteúdo orbitário foi removido e examinado histologicamente. RESULTADOS: Cinco animais (27,2%) que receberam os implantes de polietileno poroso tiveram extrusão do implante. Houve extrusão em 94,4% dos animais que receberam a esfera de polietileno gel, tendo-se observado que o diâmetro das esferas gel extruídas encontrava-se aumentado em relação ao diâmetro da esfera implantada. A ultra-sonografia mostrou que o implante de polietileno poroso se vascularizou e que o gel não, o que foi confirmado pelo exame histológico. CONCLUSÃO: Esferas de polietileno no estado gel sofrem hidratação e aumentam de volume, sendo necessário conhecer o seu tamanho final antes da implantação. A ultra-sonografia permite conhecer a vascularização do implante, podendo ser usada na avaliação da integração esfera-hospedeiro.
PURPOSE: To evaluate porous polyethylene implants as compared to solid and gel spheres in anophthalmic cavities. METHODS: Thirty-six white rabbits underwent a right eye enucleation with placement of 12 mm of porous (18 animals) or gel (18 animals) polyethylene spheres. The animals were submitted to weekly clinical evaluation. Ultrasound examinations were done 30, 60 and 90 days after surgery and the animals were sacrificed on the day 90th. Then, the orbit content was removed and submitted to light microscopy. RESULTS: Five animals (27.2%) which received porous polyethylene spheres presented sphere extrusion. With the gel polyethylene spheres, the extrusions happened in 94.4% of the animals and it was observed that the expelled gel spheres had higher diameter then the implanted ones. Ultrasound evaluation showed that the porous polyethylene implant becomes vascularized but the gel not, as confirmed by histological examination. CONCLUSION: Spheres of material in the gel state hydrate and increase in volume making it necessary to know the final size before the implantation. Ultrasound examination allows the evaluation of the implant-tissue integration.
PURPOSE: To evaluate porous polyethylene implants as compared to solid and gel spheres in anophthalmic cavities. METHODS: Thirty-six white rabbits underwent a right eye enucleation with placement of 12 mm of porous (18 animals) or gel (18 animals) polyethylene spheres. The animals were submitted to weekly clinical evaluation. Ultrasound examinations were done 30, 60 and 90 days after surgery and the animals were sacrificed on the day 90th. Then, the orbit content was removed and submitted to light microscopy. RESULTS: Five animals (27.2%) which received porous polyethylene spheres presented sphere extrusion. With the gel polyethylene spheres, the extrusions happened in 94.4% of the animals and it was observed that the expelled gel spheres had higher diameter then the implanted ones. Ultrasound evaluation showed that the porous polyethylene implant becomes vascularized but the gel not, as confirmed by histological examination. CONCLUSION: Spheres of material in the gel state hydrate and increase in volume making it necessary to know the final size before the implantation. Ultrasound examination allows the evaluation of the implant-tissue integration.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Polietilenos, Implantes orbitários, Coelhos, Ultra-sonografia, Polyethylenes, Orbital implants, Rabbits, Ultrasonography
Como citar
Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia. Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia, v. 69, n. 3, p. 305-308, 2006.