Comparison of lyophilized glutaraldehyde-preserved bovine pericardium with different vascular prostheses for use as vocal cords implants: experimental study.

J Raúl Olmos-Zuñiga,Avelina Sotres-Vega,Claudia Hernández-Jiménez,Fernando Arredondo Del Bosque,Rogelio Jasso-Victoria,Patricio Santillan-Doherty,Matilde Baltazares-Lipp,Miguel Gaxiola-Gaxiola

doi:10.1155/2015/351862

J Raúl Olmos-Zuñiga, Avelina Sotres-Vega + Show 6 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/351862

Copy DOI

Abstract

This study compared the use of lyophilized glutaraldehyde-preserved bovine pericardium (LGPBP), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), and Teflon felt (TF) as implants for vocal cords (VC) medialization and aimed to assess the endoscopic, macroscopic, and microscopic VC changes after medialization in a canine model. In 18 mongrel dogs, the right VC were medialized with LGPBP and the left were implanted as follows: Group I (n = 6): LGPBP and PTFE; Group II (n = 6): LGPBP and PET; Group III (n = 6): LGPBP and TF. Surgical handling of the implants was compared. Three months after surgery, macroscopic and microscopic changes of VC and implants were evaluated. LGPBP offered the best surgical handling (p = 0.005, Kruskal-Wallis). TF implants showed extrusion (p = 0.005, Kruskal-Wallis) and severe inflammation. All VC formed fibrous capsules around the implants; the ones developed by LGPBP implants were thinner (p = 0.001, ANOVA, Tukey). VC implanted with synthetic materials showed eosinophilic infiltration (p = 0.01, Kruskal-Wallis). We concluded that the LGPBP could be used as an implant for VC medialization because it is biocompatible, easy to handle and remove during surgical procedures, and nonabsorbable or extrudable and produces an inflammatory reaction similar to PTFE and PET.

Highlights

Medialization of paralyzed vocal cords (VC) by type I thyroplasty is a transcervical surgical procedure in which a prosthesis is implanted in the entire length of the vocal fold through a window made in the thyroid cartilage and placed into a small dissection sac within the paraglottic space to transfer the VC to the midline to improve glottic closure [1,2,3]
The aim of this study was to compare the use of Lyophilized glutaraldehyde-preserved bovine pericardium (LGPBP), PTFE, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), and Teflon felt (TF) as implants for VC medialization and to assess the endoscopic, macroscopic, and microscopic VC changes after medialization in a canine model
The purpose of this study was to compare the use of LGPBP, PTFE, PET, and TF as implants for VC medialization and to assess the endoscopic, macroscopic, and microscopic VC changes after medialization in an experimental canine model

Summary

Introduction

Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) (Goretex), polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (Dacron), and Teflon felt (TF) are materials that have been used for the construction of vascular prostheses and meshes to treat abdominal hernias. These materials are biocompatible and allow graft coverage with tissue that is similar to normal [4]. PET and TF are materials with similar characteristics to PTFE, but there are no reports in the literature of their use for VC medialization. The cost of these materials in Mexico is very high and patients requiring treatment generally have poor healthcare coverage and restricted access to these implants, so it is necessary to seek other materials with these characteristics

Objectives

Methods

Conclusion