Interpositional grafts between mucoperiosteal flaps are commonly used in the repair of septal perforations. We studied the use of bioactive glass (BAG) S53P4 as an interpositional graft and the use of turbinate flaps in 23 patients with septal perforations. Another 16 patients were treated with mucoperiosteal flaps only. The perforations were successfully closed in 38 of the 39 patients. One patient had a near-total septal perforation due to hypophysial surgery; it could not be closed. No extrusions of the BAG and no BAG-associated infections were seen; the average follow-up period was 28 months. BAG S53P4 seems to be a good interpositional graft in the repair of medium and large nasal septal perforations, and turbinate flaps are also reliable.
DeWeeseDDSaundersWH. The nasal septum. In: DeWeeseDDSaundersWH, eds. Textbook of otolaryngology. St Louis, Mo: CV Mosby, 1973: 216–8.
2.
CottleMH. Nasal atrophy, atrophic rhinitis, ozena: Medical and surgical treatment: Repair of septal perforations. J Int Coll Surg1958; 29: 472–84.
3.
KridelRHW. Nasal septal perforation. In: GatesGA, ed. Current therapy in otolaryngology—head and neck surgery. St Louis, Mo: Mosby—Year Book, 1994: 361–5.
4.
KridelRHWApplingWDWrightWK. Septal perforation closure utilizing the external septorhinoplasty approach. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg1986; 112: 168–72.
5.
KridelRHW. The open approach for repair of septal perforations. In: DanielRK, ed. Aesthetic plastic surgery: Rhinoplasty. Boston, Mass: Little, Brown & Co, 1993: 555–66.
6.
KridelRHW. Combined septal perforation repair with revision rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am1995; 3: 459–72.
7.
GoodmanWSStrelzowVV. The surgical closure of nasoseptal perforations. Laryngoscope1982; 92: 121–4.
8.
GollomJ. Perforation of the nasal septum. The reverse flap technique. Arch Otolaryngol1968; 88: 518–22.
9.
FairbanksDN. Closure of nasal septal perforations. Arch Otolaryngol1980; 106: 509–13.
10.
KridelRHWFodaHLundeKC. Septal perforation repair with acellular human dermal allograft. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg1998; 124: 73–8.
SaundersWH. Atrophic rhinitis: Results of surgical treatment. AMA Arch Otolaryngol1958; 68: 342–5.
15.
SuominenEAKinnunenJ. Bioactive glass granules and plates in the reconstruction of defects of the facial bones. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg1996; 30: 281–9.
LarmasESewónLLuostarinenTKangasniemiIYli-UrpoA. Bioactive glass in periodontal defects. Initial findings of soft tissue and osseus repair. In: WilsonJHenchLLGreenspanD, eds. Bioceramics. Vol 8. Oxford, England: Elsevier Science, 1995:279–84.
18.
AitasaloKSuonpääJPeltolaMYli-UrpoA. Behaviour of bioactive glass (S53P4) in human frontal sinus obliteration. In: SedelLReyC, eds. Bioceramics. Vol 10. Oxford, England: Elsevier Science, 1997: 429–32.
19.
PeltolaMSuonpääJAitasaloKVarpulaMYli-UrpoAHapponenR-P. Obliteration of the frontal sinus cavity with bioactive glass. Head Neck1998; 20: 315–9.
20.
StoorPSöderlingEGrenmanR. Interactions between the bioactive glass S53P4 and the atrophic rhinitis-associated microorganism Klebsiella ozaenae.J Biomed Mater Res1999; 48: 869–74.
21.
HenchLLPaschallHA. Direct chemical bond of bioactive glass-ceramic materials to bone and muscle. J Biomed Mater Res1973; 7: 25–42.
22.
HenchLLSplinterRJAllenWCGreenleeTK. Bonding mechanism at the interface of ceramic prosthetic materials. J Biomed Mater Res1971; 5: 117–41.
23.
HäkkinenLYli-UrpoAHeinoJLarjavaH. Attachment and spreading of human gingival fibroblasts on potentially bioactive glasses in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res1988; 22: 1043–59.
24.
WilsonJPigottGHSchoenFJHenchLL. Toxicology and biocompatibility of bioglasses. J Biomed Mater Res1981; 15: 805–17.
25.
HeikkiläJTAhoAJYli-UrpoAAnderssonOHAhoHJHapponenR-P. Bioactive glass versus hydroxylapatite in reconstruction of osteochondral defects in the rabbit. Acta Orthop Scand1993; 64: 678–82.
26.
SchepersEde ClercqMDucheynePKempeneersR. Bioactive glass particulate material as a filler for bone lesions. J Oral Rehabil1991; 18: 439–52.
27.
StoorPSöderlingEGrénmanR. Bioactive glass S53P4 in repair of septal perforations and its interactions with the respiratory infection-associated microorganisms Haemophilus influenzae and Streptococcus pneumoniae.J Biomed Mater Res2001; 58: 113–20.
28.
StoorPKirstiläVSöderlingEKangasniemiIHerbstKYli-UrpoA. Interactions between bioactive glass S53P4 and periodontal pathogens. Microb Ecol Health Dis1996; 9: 109–14.
29.
StoorPSöderlingESalonenJI. Antibacterial effects of bioactive glass paste on oral microorganisms. Acta Odontol Scand1998; 56: 161–5.
30.
AnderssonÖHLiuGKarlssonKHNiemiLMiettinenJJuhanojaJ. In vivo behaviour of glasses in the SiO2-Na2O-CaO-P5O2-Al3O2-B2O3 system. J Mater Sci Mater Med1990; 1: 219–27.
31.
CottleMHLokingRMFisctterGGGayonJG. The “maxilla-premaxilla” approach to extensive nasal septum surgery. Arch Otolaryngol1958; 68: 301–13.
32.
MasingHGammertCHJaumannMP. Unser Konzept zur operativen Behandlung von Septumperforationen. Laryngol Rhinol Otol (Stuttg)1980; 59: 50–6.
