Literature DB >> 11021384

The bioceramic orbital implant: a new generation of porous implants.

D R Jordan1, L A Mawn, S Brownstein, T M McEachren, S M Gilberg, V Hill, S Z Grahovac, J P Adenis.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The authors describe a new generation of porous orbital implant made of aluminum oxide (Al2O3) and compare it with the hydroxyapatite orbital implants (Bio-Eye and FCI hydroxyapatite).
METHODS: The authors examined the new implant macroscopically, with chemical analysis and microscopically with scanning electron microscopy. Animal implantation studies were performed using six adult male New Zealand albino rabbits. Implant vascularization was evaluated by means of magnetic resonance imaging and histopathologic sectioning.
RESULTS: The Bioceramic orbital implant was found to have very uniform pore structure with an average pore size of 500 microm. The implant was 99.9% aluminum oxide on x-ray diffraction. Magnetic resonance imaging in vivo vascularization studies demonstrated enhancement of the implant to its center by 4 weeks after implantation in the rabbit. Histopathologically, fibrovascularization occurred uniformly throughout the implant and was noted by 4 weeks.
CONCLUSIONS: The Bioceramic orbital implant represents a new porous orbital implant that has a very regular and extensive interconnected pore system, is as biocompatible as hydroxyapatite, is easy to manufacture, structurally strong, and free of contaminants. It is manufactured with no disruption to marine life ecosystems as may occur in the harvesting of coral for other orbital implants. It is less expensive than currently available hydroxyapatite implants and was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in April 2000.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11021384     DOI: 10.1097/00002341-200009000-00008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0740-9303            Impact factor:   1.746


  7 in total

1.  MR imaging of progressive enhancement of a bioceramic orbital prosthesis: an indicator of fibrovascular invasion.

Authors:  J D Barnwell; M Castillo
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2010-03-25       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  [Porous orbital implants].

Authors:  B Cleres; H W Meyer-Rüsenberg
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 1.059

Review 3.  Integrated versus non-integrated orbital implants for treating anophthalmic sockets.

Authors:  Silvana Schellini; Regina El Dib; Leandro Re Silva; Joyce G Farat; Yuqing Zhang; Eliane C Jorge
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-11-07

4.  [Long-term results of the compatibility of a coralline hydroxyapatite implant as eye replacement].

Authors:  R Thiesmann; A Anagnostopoulos; B Stemplewitz
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.059

5.  Standard enucleation with aluminium oxide implant (bioceramic) covered with patient's sclera.

Authors:  Gian Luigi Zigiotti; Sonia Cavarretta; Mariachiara Morara; Sang Min Nam; Stefano Ranno; Francesco Pichi; Andrea Lembo; Stefano Lupo; Paolo Nucci; Alessandro Meduri
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2012-04-30

Review 6.  Ocular implants-methods of ocular reconstruction following radical surgical interventions.

Authors:  Corina Teodora Catalu; Sânziana Luminiţa Istrate; Liliana Mary Voinea; Costin Mitulescu; Viorela Popescu; Ciuluvică Radu
Journal:  Rom J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018 Jan-Mar

Review 7.  The Evolution of Orbital Implants and Current Breakthroughs in Material Design, Selection, Characterization, and Clinical Use.

Authors:  Xiao-Yi Chen; Xue Yang; Xing-Li Fan
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-02-17
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.