dc.contributorUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.contributorUniversidade Federal de São Carlos (UFSCar)
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-27T11:26:49Z
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-05T18:34:28Z
dc.date.available2014-05-27T11:26:49Z
dc.date.available2022-10-05T18:34:28Z
dc.date.created2014-05-27T11:26:49Z
dc.date.issued2012-06-01
dc.identifierOrbit, v. 31, n. 3, p. 143-149, 2012.
dc.identifier0167-6830
dc.identifier1744-5108
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/73357
dc.identifier10.3109/01676830.2011.648798
dc.identifier2-s2.0-84860578159
dc.identifier9420249100835492
dc.identifier0019393779801069
dc.identifier0000-0002-4494-4180
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/3922360
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Bioactive glass and bioactive glass-ceramic cone implants were placed in the rabbit eviscerated socket to assess their biocompatibility. Methods: Fifty-one Norfolk albino rabbits underwent evisceration of the right eye followed by implantation of cones made from Bioglass® 45S5 (control group) and two types of bioactive glass-ceramic (Biosilicate®), a single- and a two-phase bioactive glass-ceramic implants into the scleral cavity. Postoperative reactions, animal behavior and socket conditions were monitored daily. Clinical exam, biochemical evaluations, and orbit computed tomographic scan were done at 7, 90, and 180 days post-procedure. After that, the animals were euthanized, and the orbital content was removed and prepared to light microscopy with morphometric evaluation and scanning electron microscopy examination. Statistical analysis was done by parametric and non-parametric analysis of variance, complemented by Dunn's and Tukey's tests (p<0.05). Results: All animals did not develop systemic toxicity throughout the experimental period and also did not have orbit infection, implant migration or extrusion. Morphological analysis demonstrated pseudocapsule around all implants. Bioglass® and single-phase Biosilicate® implants induced less inflammation and pseudocapsule formation than two-phase Biosilicate® cones. Seven days post-procedure, the inflammatory reaction was intense and gradually decreased throughout the experiment. Tissue reaction was least intense in animals receiving Bioglass® implants. Conclusions: We observe discrete differences among the studied materials, with best responses obtained with use of Bioglass® 45S5 and single-phase Biosilicate®. The authors agree these implants might be useful in the management of the anophthalmic socket. © 2012 Informa Healthcare USA, Inc.
dc.languageeng
dc.relationOrbit
dc.relation0,419
dc.relation0,419
dc.rightsAcesso restrito
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectAnophthalmic socket
dc.subjectBioactive glass
dc.subjectBiocompatibility
dc.subjectExperimental study
dc.subjectGlass-ceramic
dc.subjectRabbit
dc.subjectglass
dc.subjectanimal experiment
dc.subjectanimal model
dc.subjectanophthalmia
dc.subjectbiocompatibility
dc.subjectceramics
dc.subjectcomputer assisted tomography
dc.subjectcontrolled study
dc.subjectevisceration
dc.subjectimplant
dc.subjectimplantation
dc.subjectmorphology
dc.subjectnonhuman
dc.subjectorbit
dc.subjectrabbit
dc.subjectscanning electron microscopy
dc.subjecttreatment outcome
dc.subjectAnimals
dc.subjectBiocompatible Materials
dc.subjectCeramics
dc.subjectDisease Models, Animal
dc.subjectEye Evisceration
dc.subjectGlass
dc.subjectMaterials Testing
dc.subjectMicroscopy, Electron, Scanning
dc.subjectOrbit
dc.subjectOrbital Implants
dc.subjectProsthesis Implantation
dc.subjectRabbits
dc.titleBiocompatibility analysis of Bioglass® 45S5 and Biosilicate® implants in the rabbit eviscerated socket
dc.typeArtigo


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución