Literature DB >> 26663848

In vitro evaluation of decellularized ECM-derived surgical scaffold biomaterials.

Xiao Luo1,2, Katherine M Kulig1, Eric B Finkelstein1,3, Margaret F Nicholson1, Xiang-Hong Liu4, Scott M Goldman4, Joseph P Vacanti5,6, Brian E Grottkau6,7, Irina Pomerantseva1,5,6, Cathryn A Sundback1,5,6, Craig M Neville1,5,6,7.   

Abstract

Decellularized extracellular matrix (ECM) biomaterials are increasingly used in regenerative medicine for abdominal tissue repair. Emerging ECM biomaterials with greater compliance target surgical procedures like breast and craniofacial reconstruction to enhance aesthetic outcome. Clinical studies report improved outcomes with newly designed ECM scaffolds, but their comparative biological characteristics have received less attention. In this study, we investigated scaffolds derived from dermis (AlloDerm Regenerative Tissue Matrix), small intestinal submucosa (Surgisis 4-layer Tissue Graft and OASIS Wound Matrix), and mesothelium (Meso BioMatrix Surgical Mesh and Veritas Collagen Matrix) and evaluated biological properties that modulate cellular responses and recruitment. An assay panel was utilized to assess the ECM scaffold effects upon cells. Results of the material-conditioned media study demonstrated Meso BioMatrix and OASIS best supported cell proliferation. Meso BioMatrix promoted the greatest migration and chemotaxis signaling, followed by Veritas and OASIS; OASIS had superior suppression of cell apoptosis. The direct adhesion assay indicated that AlloDerm, Meso BioMatrix, Surgisis, and Veritas had sidedness that affected cell-material interactions. In the chick chorioallantoic membrane assay, Meso BioMatrix and OASIS best supported cell infiltration. Among tested materials, Meso BioMatrix and OASIS demonstrated characteristics that facilitate scaffold incorporation, making them promising choices for many clinical applications.
© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 105B: 585-593, 2017. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cell adhesion; cell proliferation; extracellular matrix; in vitro; scaffolds

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26663848     DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.33572

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater        ISSN: 1552-4973            Impact factor:   3.368


  9 in total

1.  Human barrier models for the in vitro assessment of drug delivery.

Authors:  Matthias Schweinlin; Angela Rossi; Nina Lodes; Christian Lotz; Stephan Hackenberg; Maria Steinke; Heike Walles; Florian Groeber
Journal:  Drug Deliv Transl Res       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 4.617

2.  Rapid production of human liver scaffolds for functional tissue engineering by high shear stress oscillation-decellularization.

Authors:  Giuseppe Mazza; Walid Al-Akkad; Andrea Telese; Lisa Longato; Luca Urbani; Benjamin Robinson; Andrew Hall; Kenny Kong; Luca Frenguelli; Giusi Marrone; Oliver Willacy; Mohsen Shaeri; Alan Burns; Massimo Malago; Janet Gilbertson; Nigel Rendell; Kevin Moore; David Hughes; Ioan Notingher; Gavin Jell; Armando Del Rio Hernandez; Paolo De Coppi; Krista Rombouts; Massimo Pinzani
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Development of novel biocompatible thermosensitive anti-adhesive agents using human-derived acellular dermal matrix.

Authors:  Jong Ju Jeong; Dong Won Lee; Seung Yong Song; Yerin Park; Ji Hee Kim; Jang Il Kim; Hyung Goo Kim; Ki Taek Nam; Won Jai Lee; Kee-Hyun Nam; Ju Hee Lee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-02-22       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Efficacy and safety of temperature-sensitive acellular dermal matrix in prevention of postoperative adhesion after thyroidectomy: A randomized, multicenter, double-blind, non-inferiority study.

Authors:  Jin Kyong Kim; Cho Rok Lee; Sang-Wook Kang; Jong Ju Jeong; Kee-Hyun Nam; Sung-Rae Cho; Seongmoon Jo; Eun Young Kim; Ji-Sup Yun; Hee Jin Park; Mi Sung Kim; Kwangsoon Kim; Sohee Lee; Ja Seong Bae; So Yeon Jun; Jihye Park; Jeong Soo Kim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-09-19       Impact factor: 3.752

5.  Evaluation of Xenograft Efficacy in Immediate Prosthesis-based Breast Reconstruction.

Authors:  Nikhil Sobti; Neel Vishwanath; Victor A King; Vinay Rao; Ben Rhee; Carole S L Spake; Mimi R Borrelli; Ronald A Akiki; Karl H Breuing
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2022-09-28

6.  Inadequate Processing of Decellularized Dermal Matrix Reduces Cell Viability In Vitro and Increases Apoptosis and Acute Inflammation In Vivo.

Authors:  Aaron H Morris; Julie Chang; Themis R Kyriakides
Journal:  Biores Open Access       Date:  2016-07-01

7.  Is single-stage implant-based breast reconstruction (SSBR) with an acellular matrix safe?: Strattice™ or Meso Biomatrix® in SSBR.

Authors:  Nadine S Hillberg; Patrick I Ferdinandus; Rieky E G Dikmans; Bjorn Winkens; Juliette Hommes; René R W J van der Hulst
Journal:  Eur J Plast Surg       Date:  2018-04-24

8.  Extracellular matrix-based biomaterials as adipose-derived stem cell delivery vehicles in wound healing: a comparative study between a collagen scaffold and two xenografts.

Authors:  Héctor Capella-Monsonís; Andrea De Pieri; Rita Peixoto; Stefanie Korntner; Dimitrios I Zeugolis
Journal:  Stem Cell Res Ther       Date:  2020-11-27       Impact factor: 6.832

9.  First-year complications after immediate breast reconstruction with a biological and a synthetic mesh in the same patient: A randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Emma Hansson; Ann-Chatrin Edvinsson; Anna Elander; Lars Kölby; Håkan Hallberg
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-10-13       Impact factor: 3.454

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.