[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 18.209.104.7. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
January 1993

Hydroxyapatite in Experimental Laryngotracheal Reconstruction

Author Affiliations
From the Division of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology (Dr Triglia) and the Departments of Otorhinolaryngology (Drs Triglia and Cannoni), Histopathology (Dr Scheiner), and Biomathematics (Dr Gouvernet), Marseille (France) University Medical School. Presented in part at the First International Laryngotracheal Reconstruction Symposium, Cleveland, Ohio, August 25, 1991.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1993;119(1):87-91. doi:10.1001/archotol.1993.01880130089013
Abstract

• Current concepts in laryngotracheal reconstruction include lumen augmentation with interposition of autogenous costal cartilage. In an effort to reduce potential increased morbidity at the donor site, the use of porous hydroxyapatite was compared with autogenous costal cartilage in an experimental study. Ninety-nine New Zealand rabbits were randomly operated on to receive autogenous costal cartilage (n=32), hydroxyapatite covered by a perichondrium graft (n=33), or hydroxyapatite alone (n=34). Rabbits were killed at 3 months after the surgery. Clinically (n=85), no difference was found among the groups. Histologically (n=81), grafts (n=54) in the group receiving autogenous costal cartilage were greater than in those receiving the hydroxyapatite. Concerning the value of epithelial layer covering the graft, the rate of inflammation, the cricoid-graft interface, and the graft viability, no difference was noted among the groups. In the group in which no graft was found (n=27), a fibrous bridge maintaining a cricoid distraction was noted in 23 cases. This study shows the possible value of hydroxyapatite in the animal model, but before clinical application, the natural course of the fibrous bridge must be documented.

(Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1993;119:87-91)

×