Literature DB >> 22564232

Effects of collagen prosthesis cross-linking on long-term tissue regeneration following the repair of an abdominal wall defect.

Gemma Pascual1, Marta Rodríguez, Sandra Sotomayor, Eduardo Moraleda, Juan M Bellón.   

Abstract

Collagen prostheses used to repair abdominal wall defects, depending on their pretreatment (noncross-linked vs. cross-linked), besides repair may also achieve tissue regeneration. We assessed the host tissue incorporation of different bioprostheses using a new tool that combines immunofluorescence confocal microscopy with differential interference contrast images, making it possible to distinguish newly formed collagen. Partial hernial defects in the abdominal wall of rabbits were repaired using cross-linked/noncross-linked bioprostheses. Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) was used as control. After 14/30/90/180 days of implant, specimens were taken for microscopy, immunohistochemistry, and quantitative-reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction to determine host tissue ingrowth and collagen I/III protein and 1a1/3a1 gene expression. Shrinkage and stress resistance were also examined. At 14 days, cross-linked prostheses had suffered significantly less shrinkage than ePTFE or noncross-linked prostheses. Significantly higher shrinkage was recorded for ePTFE in the longer term. Microscopy revealed encapsulation of ePTFE by neoformed tissue, while the bioprostheses became gradually infiltrated by host tissue. Noncross-linked prosthesis showed better tissue ingrowth, more intense inflammatory reaction and more rapid degradation than the cross-linked prostheses. At 14 days, cross-linked prostheses induced up-regulated collagen 1a1 and 3a1 gene expression, while noncross-linked only showed increased collagen III protein expression at 90 days postimplant. At 6 months, the tensile strengths of cross-linked prostheses were significantly greater compared with ePTFE. Our findings demonstrate that despite the cross-linked collagen prostheses promoting less tissue ingrowth than the noncross-linked meshes, they became gradually replaced by good quality host tissue and were less rapidly degraded, leading to improved stress resistance in the long term.
© 2012 by the Wound Healing Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22564232     DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2012.00781.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Wound Repair Regen        ISSN: 1067-1927            Impact factor:   3.617


  5 in total

1.  To cross-link or not to cross-link? Cross-linking associated foreign body response of collagen-based devices.

Authors:  Luis M Delgado; Yves Bayon; Abhay Pandit; Dimitrios I Zeugolis
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part B Rev       Date:  2015-03-12       Impact factor: 6.389

2.  Diaphragmatic crural augmentation utilising cross-linked porcine dermal collagen biologic mesh (Permacol) in the repair of large and complex para-oesophageal herniation: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  H C Travers; J O Brewer; N J Smart; S A Wajed
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2015-05-08       Impact factor: 4.739

3.  Targeted protein delivery: carbodiimide crosslinking influences protein release from microparticles incorporated within collagen scaffolds.

Authors:  Constantin Edi Tanase; Omar Qutachi; Lisa J White; Kevin M Shakesheff; Andrew W McCaskie; Serena M Best; Ruth E Cameron
Journal:  Regen Biomater       Date:  2019-04-22

4.  Repair of abdominal wall defects with biodegradable laminar prostheses: polymeric or biological?

Authors:  Gemma Pascual; Sandra Sotomayor; Marta Rodríguez; Bárbara Pérez-Köhler; Juan M Bellón
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-12-21       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Prosthetics and Techniques in Repair of Animal's Abdominal Wall.

Authors:  Gamal Karrouf; Adel Zaghloul; Mohamed Abou-Alsaud; Elie Barbour; Khaled Abouelnasr
Journal:  Scientifica (Cairo)       Date:  2016-05-11
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.