Comparison of Survival of SureDerm®, Permacol® Graft in Mouse

마우스에서 SureDerm®, Permacol® 이식 생존에 대한 비교

  • Hong, Jung Soo (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, College of Medicine, Chung-Ang University) ;
  • Kim, Woo Seob (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, College of Medicine, Chung-Ang University) ;
  • Yu, Young Il (Yu Young Il Plastic Surgery Clinics) ;
  • Kim, Han Koo (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, College of Medicine, Chung-Ang University)
  • 홍정수 (중앙대학교 의과대학 성형외과학교실) ;
  • 김우섭 (중앙대학교 의과대학 성형외과학교실) ;
  • 유영일 (유영일 성형외과) ;
  • 김한구 (중앙대학교 의과대학 성형외과학교실)
  • Received : 2007.03.25
  • Published : 2007.11.10

Abstract

Purpose: Numerous materials, both autologous and nonautologous, have been used for augmentation of sunken areas and each has its own limitations. The ideal material for augmentation should not be absorbed in any manner. This study is designed to assess the survival of $SureDerm^{(R)}$, $Permacol^{(R)}$ graft according to the volume and histologic change. Methods: Twenty four mice, weighing about 50 grams and of 5 weeks of age were used. $SureDerm^{(R)}$ is an acellular dermal matix obtained from human cadeveric skin. $Permacol^{(R)}$ is a porcine derived acellular dermal matrix whose manufacture involves trypsinisation, solvent extraction. Graft pieces standardized to $1{\times}1cm$ size were used in each group. The implanted material were taken 1, 4, 8 and 12 weeks later, respectively. The changes of graft volume during the graft period were measured on initial, 1, 4, 8 and 12 weeks. Results: The initial shape of graft was maintained up to 12 weeks in $Permacol^{(R)}$ graft group and mean survival rate was $80.36{\pm}8.21%$ in $SureDerm^{(R)}$, $89.57{\pm}6.39%$ in $Permacol^{(R)}$(p=0.01). The volume of each graft decreased 29% from initial volume on 12 weeks in $SureDerm^{(R)}$, 18% in $Permacol^{(R)}$. The structure of $Permacol^{(R)}$ remained until 12 week after implantation. Conclusion: Our experimental study suggests that $Permacol^{(R)}$ could be a safe material as an implant for permanent augmentation. However, There are further study remained for antigenicity of these material, and the choice of graft for augmentation should be remained to the clinical situations.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 중앙대학교

References

  1. Meyer R, Kesselring UK: Aesthetic surgery in the perioral region. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1: 61, 1976 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01570237
  2. Nicolle FV, Matti BA, Scamp T: Dermal and facial autografts in facial aesthetic surgery. Aesthetic Plast Surg 16: 219, 1992 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00190067
  3. Thompson N: The subcutaneous dermis graft; a clinical and histologic study in man. Plast Reconstr Surg Transplant Bull 26: 1, 1960 https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-196007000-00001
  4. Burke JF, Yannas IV, Quinby WC Jr, Bondoc CC, Jung WK: Successful use of a physiologically acceptable artificial skin in the treatment of extensive burn injury. Ann Surg 194: 413, 1981 https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-198110000-00005
  5. Matsui R, Okura N, Osaki K, Konishi J, Ikegami K, Koide M: Histological evaluation of skin reconstruction using artificial dermis. Biomaterials 17: 995, 1996 https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(96)84674-6
  6. MacLeod TM, Sarathchandra P, Williams G, Sanders R, Green CJ: Evaluation of a porcine origin acellular dermal matrix and small intestinal submucosa as dermal replacements in preventing secondary skin graft contraction. Burns 30: 431, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2004.01.018
  7. Wainwright D, Madden M, Luterman A, Hunt J, Monafo W, Heimbach D, Kagan R, Sittig K, Dimick A, Herndon D: Clinical evaluation of an acellular allograft dermal matrix in full-thickness burns. J Burn Care Rehabil 17: 124, 1996 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004630-199603000-00006
  8. Choi DH, Ryu IS, Hwang CW, Park MJ: Various clinical applications of human dermal allograft$(Alloderm^{\circledR})$. J Korean Soc Aesthetic Plast Surg 5: 130, 1999
  9. Kim HT, Ahn ST, Park JG: Absorption rates of variousthickness human acellular dermal grafts$(SureDerm^{\circledR})$. J Korean Soc Plast Recontr Surg 30: 224, 2003
  10. Owen KW, Yukna RA: Collagen membrane resorption in dogs: a comparative study. Implant Dent 10: 49, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-200101000-00016
  11. Park DS, Kim HK, Kim SH, Lee TJ: Comparison of survival of human dermis, $Alloderm^{\circledR}$ and $Terudermis^{\circledR}$ graft in nude mouse. J Korean Soc Plast Reconstr Surg 29: 188, 2002
  12. Sclafani AP, Pomo T 3rd, Jacono AA, McCormick S, Cocker R, Parker A: Evaluation of acellular dermal graft$(Alloderm^{\circledR})$ sheet for soft tissue augmentation: a 1-year follow-up of clinical observations and histological findings. Arch Facial Plast Surg 3: 101, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1001/archfaci.3.2.101
  13. Macleod TM, Williams G, Sanders R, Green CJ: Histological evaluation of $Permacol^{\circledR}$ as a subcutaneous implant over a 20-week period in the rat model. Br J Plast Surg 58: 518, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2004.12.012
  14. Lee DH, Han DW, Baik BS: Histologic changes of various artificial dermis graft in Rabbit. J Korean Soc Plast Reconstr Surg 27: 550, 2000