 |
|
Strength and Histological Characteristics of Periosteal Fixation to Bone After Elevation
Anthony P. Sclafani, MD;
Michael S. Fozo, MD;
Thomas Romo III, MD;
Steven A. McCormick, MD
Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2003;5:63-66.
Background Loss of brow elevation in the early postoperative period has been well documented; however, there has been no study quantifying the minimum time necessary to achieve lasting brow elevation. Previous work in our laboratory has demonstrated that complete readherence of periosteum to bone can take 12 weeks to occur after periosteal elevation. The correlation between adherence and the development of strength has never been examined.
Objective To correlate histological characteristics of raised forehead periosteum with the strength of the periosteum-bone union postoperatively.
Subjects Eighteen New Zealand white rabbits.
Methods Rabbit foreheads were elevated in a subperiosteal plane and the flap reapproximated with chromic sutures. Animals were killed at 14, 28, 45, 63, or 84 days postoperatively, and all tissue superficial to the periosteum removed. The tension required to avulse sections of periosteum was then measured. Skulls were then sectioned and prepared for histological analysis of remaining periosteum. Avulsion forces and histological findings were compared with those unoperated-on controls.
Results The forces necessary to avulse periosteum in the 14- and 28-day groups were significantly lower than for control animals; values at 45, 63, and 84 days were not significantly different from control animals. Healing periosteum displayed varying degrees of thickness, cellularity, edema, and vascular congestion. These features peaked at 28 days postoperatively then gradually resolved to near-control values by 84 days. Significant periosteal-to-bone contact did not appear until 45 days postoperatively.
Conclusion Our results promote the use of methods of brow fixation that support mobilized soft tissues for a minimum of 6 weeks, until the elevated periosteum has significantly readhered to the underlying bone.
From the Division of Facial Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery (Drs Sclafani and Romo), Departments of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery (Drs Sclafani, Fozo, and Romo) and Pathology, The New York Eye & Ear Infirmary, New York (Dr McCormick), and the Department of Otolaryngology– Head & Neck Surgery, New York Medical College, Valhalla (Drs Sclafani and Romo).
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Forehead-lift: A 10-Year Review
Patrocinio and Patrocinio
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2008;10:391-394.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Determination of Shear Strength of Periosteum Attached to Bone With BioGlue Surgical Adhesive
Sidle and Maas
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2008;10:316-320.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Eyebrow Position Recognition and Correction in Reconstructive and Cosmetic Surgery
Noel and Frodel
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2008;10:44-49.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Brow-Lift: Subgaleal vs Subperiosteal Flap Adherence in the Rabbit Model
Thomas et al.
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2007;9:101-105.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Safety and Efficacy of Midface-lifts With an Absorbable Soft Tissue Suspension Device.
Newman
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2006;8:245-251.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Use of BioGlue Surgical Adhesive for Brow Fixation in Endoscopic Browplasty
Sidle et al.
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2005;7:393-397.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Endoscopic Forehead-Lift Using a Bioabsorbable Fixation Device
Holzapfel and Mangat
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2004;6:389-393.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Evaluation of Pericranial Skull Adherence and Periosteal Healing in the Rabbit Model
Isse and Sayah
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2003;5:164-165.
FULL TEXT
Periosteal Healing
Sclafani et al.
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2003;5:202-202.
FULL TEXT
|
