| Literature DB >> 26451362 |
György Szabó1, József Barabás1, Sándor Bogdán1, Zsolt Németh1, Béla Sebők2, Gábor Kiss2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Over the past 30-40 years, variousEntities:
Keywords: Carbon implant; Complication; Mandible; Reconstruction
Year: 2015 PMID: 26451362 PMCID: PMC4591193 DOI: 10.1186/s40902-015-0031-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg ISSN: 2288-8101
Clinical results
| Diagnosis | No. of patients | Successful implantations |
|---|---|---|
| Mandibular cyst | 4 | 2 |
| Augmentation | 2 | 2 |
| Replacement after tumour surgery | 10 | 7 |
| Total | 16 | 11 |
Fig. 1Compact implants with volumes corresponding to the body of the mandible. a Compact Carbulat™ implant, after resection of a gingival carcinoma (post. irrad.). b Panoramic X-ray after the surgery. The density of the Carbulat™ implant is very close to those of human bone
Fig. 2A 2-mm-thick net. a Resection of the mandible (synovial sarcoma) 2-mm-thick carbon/carbon net is screwed to the external surface of the mandible, follows the curvature of the bone. b CT picture after surgery. c 3 years after surgery
Fig. 3The bone and soft part deficiency causing the persisting facial asymmetry was corrected with a Carbulat™ net. a Hemifacial microsomia, 12 years after double rib-transplantation. b The Carbulat™ prefabricated plate screwed on the bone. c The patient before and 1 week after the surgery
Fig. 4The Carbulat™ plate had to be removed because of tumour recurrence. a X-ray picture of a huge osteosarcoma of the mandible. Very characteristic sclerotizing form. b Carbulat™ and titanium plate reconstruction. c 8 months after the first surgery the relapsed tumour (CT picture). d After removal the relapsed tumour the Carbulat plate. It is visible that the Carbulat™ plate integrated extremely well into the tissues
Fig. 5Reference implant inner side
Fig. 6Scanning electron microscope investigation of the reference implant. a The outer side, magnification ratio ×25. b Outer side, magnification ratio ×250. c Inner side, magnification ratio ×25
Fig. 7Cross section of the reference implant. a The whole cross section, magnification ratio ×25. b Near-surface region, magnification ratio ×150
Fig. 8Scanning electron microscope images of the implant retrieved from the human body, before the enzyme treatment. a Cross section, inner side, magnification ratio ×16. b Surface of the outer side, magnification ratio ×25
Fig. 9Scanning electron microscope images of the implant retrieved from the human body after the enzyme treatment (outer side). a Magnification ratio ×25. b Magnification ratio ×100
Fig. 10Scanning electron microscope images after enzyme treatment. a Cross section, magnification ratio ×35. b Near-surface region, magnification ratio ×1000
Average surface composition (at.%) on both sides of the reference and the retrieved implants treated with the enzyme solution according to the EDS measurements
| Sample | C (at.%) | O (at.%) | Na (at.%) | P (at.%) | S (at.%) | Cl (at.%) | Ca (at.%) | Fe (at.%) | Zr (at.%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reference outer side | 97.4 | 2.6 | a | b | b | a | b | b | a |
| Reference inner side | 97.0 | 2.3 | 0.4 | b | b | 0.3 | b | b | a |
| Retrieved outer side | 92.7 | 7.3 | b | a | a | b | a | a | b |
| Retrieved inner side | 89.5 | 10.5 | b | a | a | b | a | a | b |
aThe element is detectable as trace element, but the quantification is not possible (< 0.1 at.%)
bElement cannot be detected
Fig. 11Back-scattered electron image of the surface, retrieved from the human body after enzyme treatment. Different brightness means difference in the average atomic number. The formations marked with white rectangles are iron rich, and the formations marked with circles are calcium-rich particles