Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Ann Plast Surg ; 88(5 Suppl 5): S455-S460, 2022 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35690939

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The impact of fat grafting on the viscoelasticity of irradiated tissues is poorly defined. We investigate the effect of subcutaneous fat grafting on postmastectomy tissue expansion in patients undergoing delayed breast reconstruction. We quantify observed viscoelastic and trophic changes of the skin envelope. We hypothesize that fat grafting changes the trophic and viscoelastic properties of the breast soft tissue envelope. METHODS: Postmastectomy defects delayed more than 2 years and reconstructed with subpectoral tissue expanders were prospectively studied. Control (no irradiation, no fat grafting, n = 7), fat grafted (no irradiation, fat grafting n = 8), and irradiated plus fat grafting (irradiation, fat grafting, n = 9) groups were included. Hydrostatic pressures of the tissue expanders were measured before and immediately after expansion, and again postexpansion day 1. Pressure changes calculated as "postexpansion-relaxation interval": difference between maximal pressure at each expansion and the minimal pressure before the next expansion session. Differences were analyzed between groups. RESULTS: Hydrostatic pressure plots reflect the soft tissue ability to accommodate sequential expansion. Fat grafted breasts demonstrated a statistically significant increased postexpansion-relaxation interval versus the nongrafted control group (P < 0.0001). Irradiated plus fat grafting breasts achieve similar postexpansion relaxation interval to the control group (P = 0.597). These changes are observed at postoperative week 6. Viscoelastic changes impact the overall expansion time: the fat grafted group achieved total expansion 2 weeks earlier than the nongrafted control group (P = 0.019). The fat grafted, radiated group completed expansion in similar time interval as nongrafted control group. CONCLUSIONS: Observed viscoelastic changes impact the overall expansion time. Fat grafting in nonradiated mastectomy defects allows for shorter expansion period. Fat grating in radiated postmastectomy defects allows expansion durations equivalent to nonradiated, nonfat grafted control defects. There is a delayed effect of fat grafting observed at postoperative week 6.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Mastectomy , Retrospective Studies , Subcutaneous Fat/transplantation , Tissue Expansion , Tissue Expansion Devices
2.
J Mater Sci Mater Med ; 29(7): 103, 2018 Jun 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29956013

ABSTRACT

Osteoinductive capacity of demineralized bone matrix (DBM) is sometimes insufficient or shows high variability between different batches of DBM. Here, we tried to improve its osteoinductive activity by alkali-urea or trypsin treatment but this strategy was unsuccessful. Then, we tested the enrichment of DBM with a bone protein extract (BPE) containing osteogenic growth factors comparing two sources: cortical bone powder and DBM. The osteoinductive capacity (alkaline phosphatase activity) of the obtained BPEs was evaluated in vitro in C2C12 cells. Specific protein levels present in the different BPE was determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay or by a multiplex assay. BPE from cortical bone powder showed a lack of osteoinductive effect, in agreement with the low content on osteoinductive factors. In contrast, BPE from DBM showed osteoinductive activity but also high variability among donors. Thus, we decided to enrich DBM with BPE obtained from a pool of DBM from different donors. Following this strategy, we achieved increased osteoinductive activity and lower variability among donors. In conclusion, the use of a BPE obtained from a pool of demineralized bone to enrich DBM could be used to increase its osteoinductive effect and normalize the differences between donors.


Subject(s)
Bone Matrix/pathology , Bone Substitutes/chemistry , Bone and Bones/pathology , Alkaline Phosphatase/metabolism , Animals , Biocompatible Materials/metabolism , Cell Line , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Intercellular Signaling Peptides and Proteins/metabolism , L-Lactate Dehydrogenase/metabolism , Materials Testing , Mice , Osteogenesis , Powders , Trypsin/chemistry
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL