Affiliation:
1. Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laboratory of Bioregenerative Medicine and Surgery Weill Cornell Medicine New York New York USA
2. Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Cornell University Ithaca New York USA
3. Nancy E. and Peter C. Meinig School of Biomedical Engineering Cornell University New York New York USA
Abstract
AbstractAugmentation of the nasal dorsum often requires implantation of structural material. Existing methods include autologous, cadaveric or alloplastic materials and injectable hydrogels. Each of these options is associated with considerable limitations. There is an ongoing need for precise and versatile implants that produce long‐lasting craniofacial augmentation. Four separate polylactic acid (PLA) dorsal nasal implant designs were 3D‐printed. Two implants had internal PLA rebar of differing porosities and two were designed as “shells” of differing porosities. Shell designs were implanted without infill or with either minced or zested processed decellularized ovine cartilage infill to serve as a “biologic rebar”, yielding eight total treatment groups. Scaffolds were implanted heterotopically on rat dorsa (N = 4 implants per rat) for explant after 3, 6, and 12 months followed by volumetric, histopathologic, and biomechanical analysis. Low porosity implants with either minced cartilage or PLA rebar infill had superior volume retention across all timepoints. Overall, histopathologic and immunohistochemical analysis showed a resolving inflammatory response with an M1/M2 ratio consistently favoring tissue regeneration over the study course. However, xenograft cartilage showed areas of degradation and pro‐inflammatory infiltrate contributing to volume and contour loss over time. Biomechanical analysis revealed all constructs had equilibrium and instantaneous moduli higher than human septal cartilage controls. Biocompatible, degradable polymer implants can induce healthy neotissue ingrowth resulting in guided soft tissue augmentation and offer a simple, customizable and clinically‐translatable alternative to existing craniofacial soft tissue augmentation materials. PLA‐only implants may be superior to combination PLA and xenograft implants due to contour irregularities associated with cartilage degradation.