Liu Ge, Wang Qian, Yang Qinghua, Zhang Ling, Dong Weiwei, Liu Ying, Guo Rui, Han Jingjian
Plastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100144, P.R.China.
Plastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100144,
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2019 Apr 15;33(4):492-496. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.201807004.
By comparing the mechanics of human auricular cartilage, polyurethane elastic material, and high density polyethylene material (Medpor), to produce theoretical proof on choosing optimal artificial auricular scaffold materials.
The experimental materials were divided into 3 groups with 6 samples in each: the auricular cartilage group (group A), the polyurethane elastic material group (group B), and the Medpor group (group C). With an Instron5967 mechanical testing machine, compression and tensile testing were performed to respectively measure values of compression parameters (including yield stress, yield load, elastic modulus, yield compressibility, compressibility within 2 MPa, and compression stress within 10% strain) and values of tensile parameters (including yield stress, yield load, elastic modulus, yield elongation, elongation within 2 MPa, tensile stress within 1% strain) for comparison.
Compression testing: no obvious yield points were observed in the whole process in samples of group B, while obvious yield points were observed in samples of groups A and C. There was no significant difference between groups A and C with respect to yield stress and yield load ( >0.05); while the yield compressibility in group C was significantly lower than that in group A ( <0.05) and the elastic modulus in group C was significantly higher than that in group A ( <0.05). There was a significant difference with respect to compressibility within 2 MPa of materials among the 3 groups ( <0.05), the high, medium, and low values go to groups B, A, and C respectively. The compression stress within 10% strain in group C was significantly higher than that in groups A and B ( <0.05), and there was no significant difference between that in groups A and B ( >0.05). Tensile testing: the materials in group B had extremely high tensile strength. The yield stress in groups A and B was significantly higher than that in group C ( <0.05), and the elastic modulus and tensile stress within 1% strain were significantly lower than those in group C ( <0.05); but no significant difference was found between those in groups A and B ( >0.05). There was no significant difference with respect to yield load among the 3 groups ( >0.05); but there was significant difference with respect to yield elongation among the 3 groups ( <0.05), and the high, medium, and low values go to groups B, A, and C respectively. The elongation within 2 MPa in group B was significantly higher than that in groups A and C ( <0.05), and there was no significant difference between that in groups A and C ( >0.05).
Compared with the Medpor, the polyurethane elastic material is a more ideal artificial auricular scaffold material.
通过比较人耳软骨、聚氨酯弹性材料及高密度聚乙烯材料（Medpor）的力学性能，为选择最佳人工耳支架材料提供理论依据。
实验材料分为3组，每组6个样本：耳软骨组（A组）、聚氨酯弹性材料组（B组）和Medpor组（C组）。使用Instron5967材料试验机进行压缩和拉伸试验，分别测量压缩参数值（包括屈服应力、屈服载荷、弹性模量、屈服压缩率、2MPa内压缩率及10%应变时的压缩应力）和拉伸参数值（包括屈服应力、屈服载荷、弹性模量、屈服伸长率、2MPa内伸长率及1%应变时的拉伸应力）进行比较。
压缩试验：B组样本在整个过程中未观察到明显屈服点，而A组和C组样本观察到明显屈服点。A组和C组在屈服应力和屈服载荷方面无显著差异（P>0.05）；而C组的屈服压缩率显著低于A组（P<0.05），C组的弹性模量显著高于A组（P<0.05）。3组材料在2MPa内的压缩率存在显著差异（P<0.05），高、中、低值分别为B组、A组和C组。C组在10%应变时的压缩应力显著高于A组和B组（P<0.05），A组和B组之间无显著差异（P>0.05）。拉伸试验：B组材料的拉伸强度极高。A组和B组的屈服应力显著高于C组（P<0.05），1%应变时的弹性模量和拉伸应力显著低于C组（P<0.05）；但A组和B组之间无显著差异（P>0.05）。3组在屈服载荷方面无显著差异（P>0.05）；但3组在屈服伸长率方面存在显著差异（P<0.05），高、中、低值分别为B组、A组和C组。B组在2MPa内的伸长率显著高于A组和C组（P<0.05），A组和C组之间无显著差异（P>0.05）。
与Medpor相比，聚氨酯弹性材料是一种更理想的人工耳支架材料。
