Introduction: Silicone has been the standard prosthesis material for the last three decades but new materials are being searched because of the known disadvantages of silicone such as migration and high cost. We wanted to test in rats whether or not polymethylmethacrylate could be an alternative to silicone. Materials and Medhods: We prepared polymethylmethacrylate and silicone testis prostheses which were similar to testis size of rats. Eleven rats were implanted with polymethylmethacrylate, 11 others were implanted with a silicone prosthesis and sham operation was performed in 10 rats. Three months later the scrotums of the animals were removed with the prosthesis for a quantitative analysis of the chronic inflammation and fibrotic reaction and to measure the thickness of the capsule. Result: Rejection and infection were not observed in any of the prosthesis-implanted rats. Both prosthesis groups displayed increased vascularization, hemosiderin accumulation and fibrotic and hyalinized tissue formation that replaced the muscle. Chronic inflammation was measured and found to be higher in the polymethylmethacrylate group and the difference was not found to be significant. The average thicknesses of the capsules around the polymethylmethacrylate and silicone groups were found to be 58.4 and 46.8 µm, respectively, and that difference was not significant again. Conclusions: In the short term polymethylmethacrylate was equally well tolerated, but the low cost of polymethylmethacrylate made it more advantageous.

Keywords:
Testis prosthesis, Silicone, Polymethylmethacrylate
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel
2004
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.