 |
 |

Editorial Comment
Corey S. Mass, MD
Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2001;3:103.
Dr Sclafani et al are to be commended in their attempt to better characterize
the behavior of implanted homograft dermis. Their study demonstrates expected
remodeling seen in all tissue grafts as well as benefits of tissue compliance
and compatibility. As it relates to the comparison to collagen, the description
"clearly superior" might be overstated. An acelluar dermal graft (Alloderm;
LifeCell Corp, Branchburg, NJ) shows clearly longer persistence, but is considerably
more technically difficult and cannot be done as a simple office visit. Patients
who receive a homograft dermal-implant also have a longer recovery. One must
conclude that for intermediate-term augmentation 6 to 15 months of an acellular
dermal graft is a good option. But for short-term improvements with minimal
patient "downtime," intradermal type I bovine collagen cross-linked with glutaraldehyde
(Zyplast; Collegen Corp, Palo Alto, Calif) or human tissue (Dermalogen Human
Tissue Matrix; Collagenesis Inc, Beverly, Calif) are better options.
850 Parnassus Ave Suite 207 San Francisco, CA 94143 (e-mail: csmaa{at}orca.ucsf.edu
RELATED ARTICLE
Evaluation of Acellular Dermal Graft (AlloDerm) Sheet for Soft Tissue Augmentation: A 1-Year Follow-up of Clinical Observations and Histological Findings
Anthony P. Sclafani, Thomas Romo III, Andrew A. Jacono, Steven A. McCormick, Rubina Cocker, and Andrew Parker
Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2001;3(2):101-103.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|