1. Histological evaluation of Permacol™ as a subcutaneous implant over a 20-week period in the rat model 
T.M. Macleod, G. Williams, R. Sanders, C.J. Green 
British Journal of Plastic Surgery 
Volume 58, Issue 4, Pages (June 2005)
DOI: /j.bjps
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

2. Figure 1
(A) Macroscopic appearance of Permacol™. (B) Histological section stained with Masson's trichrome showing the microscopic appearance of Permacol™ with typical dermal collagen architecture (original magnification ×40).
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

3. Figure 2
(A) Macroscopic appearance of small intestinal submucosa. (B) Histological section stained with H&E showing the microscopic appearance of SIS (original magnification×40).
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

4. Figure 3
(A) Macroscopic appearance of glycerol treated-ethylene oxide sterilised porcine ADM. (B) Histological section stained with Masson's trichrome showing the microscopic appearance of Gly-EO dermis (original magnification×40).
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

5. Figure 4
Subcutaneous placement of Permacol™ implant between panniculus layer of the skin and the underlying rectus abdominus muscle layer. (A) Macroscopic view. (B) Histological section stained with Masson's trichrome showing a Permacol™ implant between the panniculus layer of the skin and the underlying rectus abdominus muscle layer (Masson's Trichrome) (original magnification×20).
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

6. Figure 5
Histological section stained with H&E showing acute neutrophilic inflammation graded as moderate (original magnification×10).
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

7. Figure 6
Histological section stained with H&E showing chronic lymphocytic inflammation with some admixed eosinophils graded as moderate–severe (original magnification×20).
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

8. Figure 7
Histological section stained with H&E showing eosinophilic infiltration graded as minimal (original magnification×40).
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

9. Figure 8
Histological section stained with H&E showing stromal fibroblastic reaction graded as mild (original magnification×10).
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

10. Figure 9
Histological section stained with Masson's trichrome demonstrating fibrosis graded as moderate (original magnification×10).
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

11. Figure 10
Histological section stained with H&E showing surrounding vascularity graded as mild (original magnification×10) at the periphery of the implant.
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

12. Figure 11
A line graph showing the change in the mean thickness of 0.75mm thickness Permacol™ implants over a 20 week period of subcutaneous implantation as assessed by Seescan image analysis. Results shown are means±standard error of the mean for n=8 implants at each time point. *P<0.05 vs. implant thickness prior to implantation.
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

13. Figure 12
A line graph showing the mean collagen density of 0.75mm thickness standard Permacol™ implants over a 20 week period of implantation as assessed by Seescan image analysis. Results are means±standard error of the mean for n=8 implants at each time point. *P<0.05; **P<0.01 vs collagen density prior to implantation.
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

14. Figure 13
A frequency distribution histogram showing the thicknesses of 25 pieces of Permacol™ cut from the same sheet of standard 0.75mm Permacol™. Measurements have been taken with spring-loaded callipers to assess both the hydrated thickness (black blocks) and nonhydrated thickness (white blocks) of each piece. Results shown are frequencies grouped to the nearest 0.05mm.
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions

15. Figure 14
The mean percentage vascularity±standard error of the mean for n=8 implants of 1.5, 0.75 and 0.4mm thickness Permacol™ 1 week (black bars) and 2 weeks (white bars) after subcutaneous implantation. No difference in the percentage vascularity of the three different thicknesses of standard Permacol™ implants after 1 week and 2 weeks of subcutaneous implantation. In addition, there is no significant increase in the percentage vascularity of any of the three thicknesses of Permacol™ from week 1 to week 2 of subcutaneous implantation.
British Journal of Plastic Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.bjps )
Copyright © 2005 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons Terms and Conditions