These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
179 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7522048)
1. Comparison of fibrovascular ingrowth into hydroxyapatite and porous polyethylene orbital implants. Rubin PA; Popham JK; Bilyk JR; Shore JW Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 1994 Jun; 10(2):96-103. PubMed ID: 7522048 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effect of sucralfate and basic fibroblast growth factor on fibrovascular ingrowth into hydroxyapatite and porous polyethylene alloplastic implants using a novel rabbit model. Rubin PA; Nicaeus TE; Warner MA; Remulla HD Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 1997 Mar; 13(1):8-17. PubMed ID: 9076777 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The influence of hyperbaric oxygen therapy and irradiation on hydroxyapatite ocular implant exposure and fibrovascular ingrowth in New Zealand white rabbits. DeBacker CM; Dutton JJ; Proia AD; Halperin EC; Wagle TN; Holck DE Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 1999 Nov; 15(6):412-9. PubMed ID: 10588250 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Primary placement of a titanium motility post in a porous polyethylene orbital implant: animal model with quantitative assessment of fibrovascular ingrowth and vascular density. Hsu WC; Green JP; Spilker MH; Rubin PA Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 2000 Sep; 16(5):370-9. PubMed ID: 11021387 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Fibrovascular ingrowth into hydroxyapatite and porous polyethylene orbital implants wrapped with acellular dermis. Thakker MM; Fay AM; Pieroth L; Rubin PA Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 2004 Sep; 20(5):368-73. PubMed ID: 15377904 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of experimental porous silicone implants and porous silicone implants. Son J; Kim CS; Yang J Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2012 Jun; 250(6):879-85. PubMed ID: 22202952 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Histological and radiological analyses of hydroxyapatite orbital implants in rabbits. Sires BS; Holds JB; Archer CR; Kincaid MC; Hageman GS Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 1995 Dec; 11(4):273-7. PubMed ID: 8746819 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A comparison of rates of fibrovascular ingrowth in wrapped versus unwrapped hydroxyapatite spheres in a rabbit model. Gayre GS; Lipham W; Dutton JJ Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 2002 Jul; 18(4):275-80. PubMed ID: 12142760 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 2-Octyl cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive and muscle attachment to porous anophthalmic orbital implants. Gupta BK; Edward D; Duffy MT Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 2001 Jul; 17(4):264-9. PubMed ID: 11476176 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Rate of vascularization of coralline hydroxyapatite spherical implants pretreated with saline/gentamicin, rTGF-beta 2, and autogenous plasma. Holck DE; Dutton JJ; Proia A; Khawly J; Mittra R; Dev S; Imami N Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 1998 Mar; 14(2):73-80. PubMed ID: 9558662 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of the exposure rate of wrapped hydroxyapatite (Bio-Eye) versus unwrapped porous polyethylene (Medpor) orbital implants in enucleated patients. Tabatabaee Z; Mazloumi M; Rajabi MT; Khalilzadeh O; Kassaee A; Moghimi S; Eftekhar H; Goldberg RA Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 2011; 27(2):114-8. PubMed ID: 20829725 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Rate of vascularization and exposure of silicone-capped porous polyethylene spherical implants: an animal model. Kalwerisky K; Mihora L; Czyz CN; Foster JA; Holck DE Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 2013; 29(5):350-6. PubMed ID: 23811596 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Fibrovascularization of porous polyethylene (Medpor) orbital implant in a rabbit model. Jordan DR; Brownstein S; Dorey M; Yuen VH; Gilberg S Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 2004 Mar; 20(2):136-43. PubMed ID: 15083083 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Exposure rate of hydroxyapatite spheres in the anophthalmic socket: histopathologic correlation and comparison with silicone sphere implants. Nunery WR; Heinz GW; Bonnin JM; Martin RT; Cepela MA Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 1993 Jun; 9(2):96-104. PubMed ID: 8391837 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Fibrovascular ingrowth in porous ocular implants: the effect of material composition, porosity, growth factors, and coatings. Bigham WJ; Stanley P; Cahill JM; Curran RW; Perry AC Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 1999 Sep; 15(5):317-25. PubMed ID: 10511211 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Porous orbital implants, wraps, and PEG placement in the pediatric population after enucleation. Wang JK; Liao SL; Lin LL; Kao SC; Tseng HS Am J Ophthalmol; 2007 Jul; 144(1):109-116. PubMed ID: 17499206 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of early fibrovascular proliferation according to orbital implant in orbital floor fracture reconstruction. Lee H; Baek S J Craniofac Surg; 2012 Sep; 23(5):1518-23. PubMed ID: 22976649 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Magnetic resonance evaluation of fibrovascular ingrowth into porous polyethylene orbital implant. Park SW; Seol HY; Hong SJ; Kim KA; Choi JC; Cha IH Clin Imaging; 2003; 27(6):377-81. PubMed ID: 14585562 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]