Literature DB >> 12522818

Hydrogels based on poly(ethylene oxide) and poly(tetramethylene oxide) or poly(dimethyl siloxane). III. In vivo biocompatibility and biostability.

Jae Hyung Park1, You Han Bae.   

Abstract

To investigate the effects of polymer chemistry and topology (linear or graft copolymer) on in vivo biocompatibility and biostability based on cage implant system, various hydrogels, composed of short hydrophilic [polyethylene oxide (PEO)] and hydrophobic block, were prepared by polycondensation reaction. Poly(tetramethylene oxide) (PTMO) or poly(dimethyl siloxane) (PDMS) was chosen as a hydrophobic block because of their wide utilization as a biomaterial. By using the specimens retrieved from rats killed after 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 weeks' implantation, cellular and material responses were assessed. Most hydrogels showed a comparable value of macrophage density to Pellethane(R), control polymer, whereas they did significantly lower foreign body giant cell (FBGC) density and coverage because of the presence of PEO. However, PEO block length and polymer topology did not affect macrophage adhesion and FBGC formation in our polymer composition. The hydrogel based on PDMS alone showed significantly lower macrophage density and FBGC density than Pellethane(R), indicating that PDMS plays a role in inhibiting cellular adhesion. The results obtained from gel permeation chromatography curve and Fourier transform infrared spectra exhibited that all the polymers were susceptible to oxidative degradation in vivo. Although Pellethane(R) revealed surface degradation by 5 weeks in vivo, hydrogels showed rapid degradation in the bulk within 2 weeks because of the penetration of oxidative chemicals released from phagocytic cells into PEO domain of phase-separated hydrogels. The more significant degradation was observed in the hydrogels with longer PEO block and PTMO as a hydrophobic block instead of PDMS. It was evident that the minor degradation could be achieved by grafting PEO and adopting PDMS as a hydrophobic block in the hydrogel. Copyright 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res 64A: 309-319, 2003

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12522818     DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.10424

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res A        ISSN: 1549-3296            Impact factor:   4.396


  7 in total

Review 1.  Engineering biomaterials to integrate and heal: the biocompatibility paradigm shifts.

Authors:  James D Bryers; Cecilia M Giachelli; Buddy D Ratner
Journal:  Biotechnol Bioeng       Date:  2012-05-24       Impact factor: 4.530

2.  Anti-inflammatory polymeric coatings for implantable biomaterials and devices.

Authors:  Amanda W Bridges; Andrés J García
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2008-11

3.  Reduced acute inflammatory responses to microgel conformal coatings.

Authors:  Amanda W Bridges; Neetu Singh; Kellie L Burns; Julia E Babensee; L Andrew Lyon; Andrés J García
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2008-09-19       Impact factor: 12.479

4.  Biomedical Applications of Biodegradable Polymers.

Authors:  Bret D Ulery; Lakshmi S Nair; Cato T Laurencin
Journal:  J Polym Sci B Polym Phys       Date:  2011-06-15

5.  Chronic inflammatory responses to microgel-based implant coatings.

Authors:  Amanda W Bridges; Rachel E Whitmire; Neetu Singh; Kellie L Templeman; Julia E Babensee; L Andrew Lyon; Andrés J García
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res A       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 4.396

6.  A review of the development of a vehicle for localized and controlled drug delivery for implantable biosensors.

Authors:  Upkar Bhardwaj; Fotios Papadimitrakopoulos; Diane J Burgess
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2008-11

7.  In vivo cytokine-associated responses to biomaterials.

Authors:  Robert J Schutte; Lola Xie; Bruce Klitzman; William M Reichert
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2008-10-11       Impact factor: 12.479

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.