ArticleWorld journal of plastic surgery2014
A Comparasion in Graft Resorption between Three Techniques of Diced Cartilage Using Surgical Blade, Electrical Grinder and Grater in Rabbit.
Article in World journal of plastic surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Resorption in Autogenous Dorsal Onlay Cartilage Grafts: An Experimental Study.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2024Article
- Effects of the Human Amniotic Membrane on the Cartilage Graft: Prognosis and Absorption in White Rabbits.World journal of plastic surgery · 2019Article
- Evidence-Based Efficacy of Autologous Grated Cartilage in Primary and Secondary Rhinoplasty.World journal of plastic surgery · 2017Article
- High Quality of Infant Chondrocytes in Comparison with Adult Chondrocytes for Cartilage Tissue Engineering.World journal of plastic surgery · 2017Article
- Comparison of Aesthetic and Functional Outcomes of Spreader Graft and Autospreader Flap in Rhinoplasty.World journal of plastic surgery · 2016Article
- Role of Nasal Skin Massage in Optimizing Secondary Rhinoplasty Results.World journal of plastic surgery · 2016Article
- Injectable Cartilage Shaving: An Autologous and Long Lasting Filler Material for Correction of Minor Contour Deformities in Rhinoplasty.World journal of plastic surgery · 2015Article
- Nasal alar necrosis following hyaluronic Acid injection into nasolabial folds: a case report.World journal of plastic surgery · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn recent years, there is an increasing tendency to use diced cartilage grafts in rhinoplasty surgery for improving dorsum contour irregularities. This study was designed to compare graft resorption between three techniques of diced cartilage using surgical blade, electrical grinder and grater in rabbit model.
methodsThirteen New Zealand rabbits were divided into three groups. Three 2×2 cm cartilage specimens were harvested from one of their ears. In group one, the cartilage was diced by use of No:11 surgical blade to o.5 to 1 mm cube pieces. In group two, an electrical grinder was used and in group three, a grater was applied. The grafts were placed in three subcutaneous pockets in the back of rabbits and after 12 weeks, the implants were removed and their weight and volume were recorded and were evaluated by histological techniques.
resultsThere was no difference between the three methods in the 3 groups for graft resorption. There was no change in the volume, but the weight showed a decrease in the control group.
conclusionsAs the histological results had no statistically difference between groups, we may recommend use of these two techniques in reconstructive and in aesthetic cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25489525PMC4236984W2145628154What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.