Fixation methods for implantable port chamber: comparative study using glue, self-stabilizing leg and suture fixations in rabbits.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the fixation strength and tissue reaction of the glue fixation and self-stabilizing leg fixation methods and to compare the results with those of the conventional tagging suture fixation method.


METHODS
Twelve healthy rabbits were selected and three different methods of implanting the port chamber were employed on the back of each rabbit. A total of thirty six port chambers were implanted with these three different methods, viz. the glue fixation method using tissue adhesive, the self-stabilizing leg method using a self-expandable stabilizing leg, and the suture fixation method. The fixation strength and the gross and histopathologic changes of each fixation method were evaluated at three days, one week, two weeks and four weeks after port implantation.


RESULTS
The glue fixation method showed a good fixation strength, which was similar to that of the tagging suture method (p = 0.3486). Five of the six ports (83%) implanted with the glue fixation method which were examined after two weeks showed cracks on the external surface, but this had no adverse effects on their function. A large amount of granulation tissue reaction was found at the bottom of the chamber (p = 0.0025). The fixation with the self-stabilizing leg showed relatively lower fixation strength (p = 0.0043), but no turning-over of the chamber occurred. The fixation strength improved with time after the first week, and minimal granulation tissue reaction was observed with this method.


CONCLUSIONS
The glue fixation method exhibited equal fixation strength compared to the suture fixation, but showed cracking and a large amount of granulation tissue, whereas the fixation with a self-stabilizing leg showed weaker fixation strength.
Na
Hyoung Il
HI
Department of Radiology, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Shim
Hyung Jin
HJ
Kwak
Byung Kook
BK
Kim
Hyeon Joo
HJ
Lee
Yong Cheol
YC
D000497:Alloys; D000818:Animals; D002196:Capillaries / Q000166:cytology / Q000378:metabolism / Q000473:pathology; D049109:Cell Proliferation; D020878:Device Removal; D004659:Enbucrilate / Q000627:therapeutic use; D016267:External Fixators; D005347:Fibroblasts / Q000378:metabolism / Q000473:pathology; D006097:Granulation Tissue / Q000098:blood supply / Q000378:metabolism / Q000473:pathology; D020007:Implants, Experimental; D023421:Models, Animal; D011817:Rabbits; D013537:Sutures / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D013997:Time Factors; D014014:Tissue Adhesives / Q000627:therapeutic use*
D000497:Alloys; D014014:Tissue Adhesives; C013616:nitinol; D004659:Enbucrilate