Literature DB >> 18235999

Blood vessel matrix: a new alternative for abdominal wall reconstruction.

C F Bellows1, W Jian, M K McHale, D Cardenas, J L West, S P Lerner, G E Amiel.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Biologic matrices offer a new approach to the management of abdominal wall defects when the use of other foreign material is not ideal. A member of our team (GEA) developed a biological decellularized matrix generated from harvested blood vessels of swine blood vessel matrix (BVMx). The aim of our study was to investigate whether this novel collagen-based biological matrix is safe and effective for the repair of abdominal wall hernia defects in a rat model.
METHODS: Full thickness abdominal wall defects were created in rats and repaired with our BVMx. After implantation as an underlay for 30 and 90 days, animals were sacrificed and the implanted material evaluated for herniation, adhesions, breaking strength, inflammation, and revascularization.
RESULTS: No evidence of herniation was noted at 30 (n = 7) or 90 (n = 7) days after repair. Adhesions, if present, were filmy and easily separated. The mean area of visceral adhesions to the BVMx was 18.9 +/- 11.0% at 30 days and 7.1 +/- 3.1% at 90 days post implantation (P = 0.33). The breaking strength of the BVMx-fascial interface was 4.5 +/- 0.8 N at 30 days and 4.5 +/- 2.4 N at 90 days post implantation (P = 0.98). Histologic analysis demonstrated that the BVMx elicited a mild transient inflammatory response and supported fibroblast migration, deposition of newly formed collagen, and neovascularization.
CONCLUSIONS: These data confirm that this BVMx supports vascular ingrowth and provides adequate strength for the repair of abdominal wall defects. Future studies in a large animal model are required to assess its validity for human application.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18235999     DOI: 10.1007/s10029-008-0340-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hernia        ISSN: 1248-9204            Impact factor:   4.739


  29 in total

1.  A comparative study of adhesion formation and abdominal wall ingrowth after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair in a porcine model using multiple types of mesh.

Authors:  J J McGinty; N J Hogle; H McCarthy; D L Fowler
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-03-23       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Tensile strength comparison of small intestinal submucosa body wall repair.

Authors:  Rainier Ko; Evelyn A Kazacos; Scott Snyder; David M J Ernst; Gary C Lantz
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2006-05-02       Impact factor: 2.192

3.  Long-term complications associated with prosthetic repair of incisional hernias.

Authors:  G E Leber; J L Garb; A I Alexander; W P Reed
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1998-04

4.  Strength over time of a resorbable bioscaffold for body wall repair in a dog model.

Authors:  S Badylak; K Kokini; B Tullius; B Whitson
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 2.192

5.  Functional small-diameter neovessels created using endothelial progenitor cells expanded ex vivo.

Authors:  S Kaushal; G E Amiel; K J Guleserian; O M Shapira; T Perry; F W Sutherland; E Rabkin; A M Moran; F J Schoen; A Atala; S Soker; J Bischoff; J E Mayer
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 53.440

6.  Histological evaluation of Permacol as a subcutaneous implant over a 20-week period in the rat model.

Authors:  T M Macleod; G Williams; R Sanders; C J Green
Journal:  Br J Plast Surg       Date:  2005-06

7.  Comparison of host response to polypropylene and non-cross-linked porcine small intestine serosal-derived collagen implants in a rat model.

Authors:  Maja L Konstantinovic; Pieter Lagae; Fang Zheng; Eric K Verbeken; Dirk De Ridder; Jan A Deprest
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 6.531

8.  Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia.

Authors:  Jacobus W A Burger; Roland W Luijendijk; Wim C J Hop; Jens A Halm; Emiel G G Verdaasdonk; Johannes Jeekel
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Morphologic study of three collagen materials for body wall repair.

Authors:  Emily E Soiderer; Gary C Lantz; Evelyn A Kazacos; Jason P Hodde; Ryan E Wiegand
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2004-05-15       Impact factor: 2.192

10.  Intestine submucosa and polypropylene mesh for abdominal wall repair in dogs.

Authors:  K M Clarke; G C Lantz; S K Salisbury; S F Badylak; M C Hiles; S L Voytik
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 2.192

View more
  3 in total

1.  Reconstruction of abdominal wall musculofascial defects with small intestinal submucosa scaffolds seeded with tenocytes in rats.

Authors:  Zhicheng Song; Zhiyou Peng; Zhengni Liu; Jianjun Yang; Rui Tang; Yan Gu
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2013-03-18       Impact factor: 3.845

2.  Blood vessel matrix seeded with cells: a better alternative for abdominal wall reconstruction-a long-term study.

Authors:  Maciej Nowacki; Arkadiusz Jundziłł; Łukasz Nazarewski; Andrzej Kotela; Tomasz Kloskowski; Joanna Skopińska-Wisniewska; Magdalena Bodnar; Aleksander Łukasiewicz; Sławomir Nazarewski; Ireneusz Kotela; Marek Kucharzewski; Marta Pokrywczyńska; Andrzej Marszałek; Tomasz Drewa
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Invivo biocompatibility determination of acellular aortic matrix of buffalo origin.

Authors:  Devarathnam Jetty; Ashok Kumar Sharma; Naveen Kumar; Sameer Shrivastava; B Sonal; R B Rai
Journal:  Prog Biomater       Date:  2014-09-23
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.