| Literature DB >> 33515166 |
Timon Hussain1,2, Donata Gellrich3,4, Svenja Siemer5, Christoph A Reichel3,4, Jonas Eckrich5, Dimo Dietrich6, Shirley K Knauer7, Roland H Stauber5, Sebastian Strieth3,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To improve the biocompatibility of porous polyethylene (PPE) implants and expand their application range for reconstructive surgery in poorly vascularized environments, implants were coated with tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) inhibitor Etanercept. While approved for systemic application, local application of the drug is a novel experimental approach. Microvascular and mechanical integration as well as parameters of inflammation were analyzed in vivo.Entities:
Keywords: ECM; Etanercept; Fluorescence microscopy; Implant integration; Porous polyethylene
Year: 2021 PMID: 33515166 PMCID: PMC8012447 DOI: 10.1007/s13770-020-00325-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Tissue Eng Regen Med ISSN: 1738-2696 Impact factor: 4.169
Fig. 1A Photographic image of a porous polyethylene implant (3 × 3 × 0.25 mm3, marked by red circle) implanted into striated muscle tissue in a dorsal skinfold chamber. B Exemplary image of the fluorescently labeled vessel network within the PPE implant on day 14 after biomaterial implantation. FITC dextran labeling allowed for precise identification of pre-existing and newly formed vasculature. Scale bar: 100 μm. C Exemplary image of Rhodamine 6G labeled leukocytes within a blood vessel in the implant material (white arrows pointing to labeled cells). Video capturing facilitated the differentiation between rolling and endothelial wall-adherent leukocytes. Scale bar: 100 μm
Fig. 2A On day 3, values for leukocyte-endothelial-cell adherence values (in mm−2) were significantly reduced in the Matrigel and Etanercept group compared to Matrigel only and uncoated implants on intra-group comparison (indicated by the following symbol: #). On day 7, both groups with coated implants showed significantly lower values compared to the uncoated implants and a significant reduction compared to the previous time point was observed for the Matrigel only group on inter-group comparison (indicated by the following symbol: *). On day 14, values for the Matrigel only group increased back to day 3 levels while the Matrigel and Etanercept group further decreased. Levels were also significantly lowered compared to both other groups on intra-group comparison. B Leukocyte flux values in n/s did not differ between groups and time points except for a slight increase for Matrigel-coated implants on compared to the other groups on day 7
Fig. 3A Functional vessel densities (in 1/cm) did not differ on day 3. On days 7 and 14, coated implants showed an increase on the intra-group level compared to the previous time point, as well as compared to the uncoated implants on inter-group comparison at the respective time points. B Vessel diameters did not differ between groups or time points. C Red blood cell velocities did not differ between groups or time points