ArticleJPRAS open2018
An experimental research in mice on the "soft tissue reaction to 3 different mesh implants: Titanium silk, Parietene Progrip and Prolene".
Article in JPRAS open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo analyze the soft tissue reaction of 'Titanium Silk' mesh implant in comparison with 'Parietene Progrip' and 'Prolene' mesh implants for the reinforcement and augmentation of soft tissues to improve the results of static correction in Facial Paralysis and other defects of Maxillofacial region. MATERIALS AND
methodsUnder standard laboratory conditions, 89 mice were divided into 4 groups: a control group of 5 mice; first group of 28 mice with Titanium mesh implant, second group of 28 mice with semi-resorbable 'Parietene Progrip' implant and third group of 28 mice with 'Prolene' implant. Under inhalational anesthesia with ethyl ether at days 7, 14, 30 and 60, seven mice from each experimental group underwent Gross and histological analysis of the mesh structures for the following characteristics: Macrophage Infiltration, Multinucleated Macrophages, Meshwork around the implant fibers, Connective tissue proliferation, Angiogenesis and Fibroblasts.
resultsHistological analysis revealed a significantly less pronounced inflammatory response to Titanium mesh implant resulting in the formation of a more delicate connective tissue network around the mesh elements.
conclusionThe experiment clearly demonstrated the cellular and tissue responses to different implantable mesh materials at various times of its integration. It revealed that the titanium mesh is the most bio-inert alloplastic material suitable for reinforcement of soft tissue augmentation and to prioritize it's use in static correction of facial paralysis and other defects of the maxillofacial region. A postoperative timeframe of 30 days is considered appropriate for the adequate formation of connective tissue around the mesh elements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.