INCONTROL PYLON SKIN

In the tissues surrounding the implants at the skin level and under the skin, no signs of inflammation were seen in the experimental SBIP-1 group, while some abscess indicators were seen in the control group. Solid implants did not have visible signs of surrounding tissues on their surfaces, while a combination of cells and fibers, including erythrocytes and lymphoid cells, were found inside the SBIP-1 in the area of contact with the bone and surrounding skin. Twenty-eight days after the operation, the implants were removed from the animals and investigated with electronic microscopy. In our preliminary in vivo studies, rats with a porous skin and bone implanted pylon 1 (SBIP-1) showed (1) no signs of inflammation compared with control rats with a solid pylon and (2) clear integration of the pylon with the surrounding skin. F 1 = “cell-to-wall” detachment (prior design), F 2 = “cell-to-wall-to-inner cell” detachment (current design). Minimal force needed for detachment of skin cell from pylon. If a natural bond is permitted between the cells outside and inside the pylon through a pore in the pylon wall, an additional “cell-to-cell” attachment (adhesion) force contributes to the resistance to the cell’s detachment, resulting in F 2 being greater than F 1. The latter is illustrated in Figure 1, in which F 1 and F 2 are the minimal forces needed for detachment of a skin cell from the pylon with the traditional “cell-to-wall” and the new “cell-to-wall-to-inner cell” attachments, respectively.

Third, the resistance to detachment increases because of the natural bond of the cells outside the pylon to the cells inside the pylon. Second, because the pylon is porous along the entire longitudinal axis, repositioning the skin does not have negative consequences, as it did in the prior model. First, by removing the circumferential collars and flanges, we can reduce the affected area of skin and tissues outside the pylon. This approach promises several advantages. Our approach is distinctive because the implanted pylon is porous throughout. Moreover, devices with connecting collars or flanges are sensitive to their positioning relative to derma and subcutaneous tissues and may not tolerate junction shifting when the distance from the bone to the skin-binding junction changes. However, cells did not penetrate perpendicular to the wall of the central core thus, the attachment of skin to the solid core was fragile. Reduced mobility of skin in the plane parallel to the mesh collar or porous flange was reported. Pendegrass and colleagues tested a solid core with a porous flange positioned in the dermal tissues immediately below the epithelium. Promising results toward achieving a barrier against infection were reported with use of a solid bar with a flexible mesh collar and holes at the subcutaneous perimeter, as well as use of a collar made by attachment of a stainless steel spring or nylon hooks. Current clinical studies use abutments with smooth surfaces, which could potentially form a layer of pus between the skin and the titanium. Attempts to optimize the roughness of the abutment for a reliable and infection-free skin-device interface were also unsuccessful. However, porous circumferential components-advantageous in the bone-device interface-were found to be possible sources of infection in the skin-device zone. Studies have tested abutments made from different materials with various circumferential components these studies aimed to promote and increase the binding junction with the skin. A serious concern is that the abutment-skin interface is vulnerable to infection. An abutment is implanted in the bone of the residuum, passing through the skin and allowing the prosthesis to be attached to the residuum.

Per-Ingvar Brånemark and his colleagues introduced direct attachment of prostheses to the residuum. To eliminate the negative outcomes of the socket-type attachment, Dr. Forces and moments are transferred from the prosthesis through the interface of the socket with the tissues and skin of the residuum, often resulting in discomfort, pain, and secondary trauma. Prosthetic rehabilitation after limb amputation is a multifaceted problem.

Incontrol pylon