This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (9)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

WILLIAM O. BARNETT, M.D.; TOM D. NORMAN, M.D.; Carolyn Anderson, M.T., A.S.C.P.

AMA Arch Surg. 1958;76(3):389-393.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Synthetic aortic substitutes have given relatively satisfactory early results and consequently are being used with increasing frequency. Many factors concerning the ultimate fate of these materials are yet to be determined. There is evidence that the fabric itself loses strength following implantation in aortas of experimental animals.⁵ That aortic homografts fail to maintain their normal histologic configuration is now well established. Among the degenerative changes which have been observed are calcification, ulceration, loss of elastic tissue elements, and marked thinning of the wall.^2,4

Observations over a two-year period of 17 dogs with nylon aortic substitutes were the subject of a previous report.¹ A presentation of the histologic characteristics of this material follows.

Materials and Methods

Animals were killed at intervals from 1 to 760 days after implantation of the nylon tubes into the abdominal aorta. The "grafted" segment along with 2 to 4 cm. of adjacent aorta . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Jackson, Miss.

From the Departments of Surgery and Pathology, University of Mississippi Medical Center.

Footnotes
Submitted for publication Aug. 27, 1957.

Supported by a grant from the Mississippi Heart Association.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?