본문 바로가기

추천 검색어

실시간 인기 검색어

학술논문

A systematic review of complications associated with nasal augmentation implants: expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex) versus silicone

이용수 0

영문명
발행기관
대한미용의학회
저자명
Han Le Thuc Hoang Michael Januszyk J. Brian Boyd
간행물 정보
『Journal of Cosmetic Medicine』Vol.1, No.2, 27~31쪽, 전체 5쪽
주제분류
의약학 > 기타의약학
파일형태
PDF
발행일자
2017.11.30
4,000

구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.

1:1 문의
논문 표지

국문 초록

영문 초록

Background: Augmentation rhinoplasty has been one of the most common cosmetic procedures in Asian population. Silicone is the most widely used nasal augmentation material in Asia. However, in the past few decades, expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE, Gore-tex ?? ) has become more popular as an alternative. Objective: In this study, complications associated with each implant aresystematically reviewed. Methods: Heuristic searches of MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were performed using the keywords “ePTFE”, “Goretex”, “silicone”, and “rhinoplasty” to identify manuscripts for inclusion. The reference lists of these articles were systematically reviewed to further identify relevant articles. Only studies with detailed complication reports (i.e., infection, malposition) were considered. Random effects meta-analysis was performed to calculate the significance of differences in complication rates between silicone and ePTFE. Results: Eighteen studies encompassing a total of 7,759 patients were analyzed, 12 with ePTFE and 6 with silicone. Among studies in which sex was reported, 88.8% of the patients were female. 88.4% of cases in the silicone group were primary, as compared to 78% in the ePTFE group. Overall complications were 5.3% for the ePTFE group and 9.2% for silicone (p<0.05). Infection rate was similar between the two groups, 1.4% for ePTFE versus 1.9% for silicone group (p>0.05). Exposure rate was also similar, 0.7% for silicone and 1.2% for ePTFE (p>0.05). Malposition rates were significantly lower in ePTFE group compared to those receiving silicone implants (2.4% versus 6.8%, p<0.05). Conclusion: Although the gold standard graft material for rhinoplasty remains autologous tissue, implant based rhinoplasty is far more common in Asian populations. Both silicone and ePTFE have acceptable risk profiles when used in selective patients for dorsal augmentation. However, given the additional risks of capsular contracture and implant malposition associated with silicone implants, ePTFE should be considered as a first-line option for implant-based nasal augmentation.

목차

Introduction
Materials and methods
Results
Discussion

키워드

해당간행물 수록 논문

참고문헌

교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!

신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.

바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!

교보e캐시 1,000원
TOP
인용하기
APA

Han Le Thuc Hoang,Michael Januszyk,J. Brian Boyd. (2017).A systematic review of complications associated with nasal augmentation implants: expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex) versus silicone. Journal of Cosmetic Medicine, 1 (2), 27-31

MLA

Han Le Thuc Hoang,Michael Januszyk,J. Brian Boyd. "A systematic review of complications associated with nasal augmentation implants: expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex) versus silicone." Journal of Cosmetic Medicine, 1.2(2017): 27-31

결제완료
e캐시 원 결제 계속 하시겠습니까?
교보 e캐시 간편 결제