| Literature DB >> 35877349 |
Heiko Sorg1,2, Daniel J Tilkorn3, Jörg Hauser3, Andrej Ring4.
Abstract
Artificial tissue substitutes are of great interest for the reconstruction of destroyed and non-functional skin or bone tissue due to its scarcity. Biomaterials used as scaffolds for tissue regeneration are non-vascularized synthetic tissues and often based on polymers, which need ingrowth of new blood vessels to ensure nutrition and metabolism. This review summarizes previous approaches and highlights advances in vascularization strategies after implantation of surface-modified biomaterials for skin and bone tissue regeneration. The efficient integration of biomaterial, bioactive coating with endogenous degradable matrix proteins, physiochemical modifications, or surface geometry changes represents promising approaches. The results show that the induction of angiogenesis in the implant site as well as the vascularization of biomaterials can be influenced by specific surface modifications. The neovascularization of a biomaterial can be supported by the application of pro-angiogenic substances as well as by biomimetic surface coatings and physical or chemical surface activations. Furthermore, it was confirmed that the geometric properties of the three-dimensional biomaterial matrix play a central role, as they guide or even enable the ingrowth of blood vessels into a biomaterial.Entities:
Keywords: bone substitutes; lactocapromer; polylactide; polymers; vascularization
Year: 2022 PMID: 35877349 PMCID: PMC9311595 DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering9070298
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioengineering (Basel) ISSN: 2306-5354
Figure 1Overview of currently used skin substitute materials [7]. Depending on which skin layer is to be restored, a distinction is made between epidermal, dermal, and combined skin substitutes. The requirements for a dermal skin substitute are more challenging than for an epidermal skin substitute, which is mainly concerned with the rapid restoration of the epidermal structures. A dermal replacement should meet the best possible natural requirements of the body’s own dermis. This includes the reconstruction of the anatomy as well as the associated physiological function. Replacement materials are designed with their basic structure to control scarring, contraction, and pain in a positive sense by reducing healing time. All the sample materials mentioned are ®.
Summary of bone graft substitutes [8,9]. Bone graft substitutes are differentiated terminologically according to their origin. Composites of the individual substitute materials are not listed.
| Autologous | Xenogen | Allogen | Alloplastic | Phycogenic | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| Hydroxyapatite from 100% inorganic calcium phosphate, of which 95% is present as apatite; source material is calcareous encrusting marine algae | |||
| spongious | Bovine | Living donor | Hydroxyapatite | Ca3(PO4)2 cements | |
| cortico-spongious | Porcine | Cadaver donor | Platelet rich plasma | Hydroxyapatite | |
| vascular | Equine | CaSo4 | β-tricalciumphosphate | ||
| Corals | Bioactive glasses | ||||
| Polymer-based substitute materials | |||||
| Metals | |||||
Figure 2(a): Macroscopic image of a mouse dorsal skin fold chamber with implanted biomaterial. Of note, around the implanted material, a fine network of newly formed blood vessels can be seen. (b,c): Scanning electron micrographs of a highly porous, biodegradable 3-D matrix of lactocapromer terpolymer based on polylactide and polycaprolactone (b) and a biodegradable synthetic polyethylene glycol terephthalate/polybutylene terephthalate (PEGT/PBT)-block copolymer matrix with different porosity, 400× magnification. (d): Scanning electron micrographs of lactocapromer terpolymer with filled pores with multiple blood vessels, 1000× magnification.
Material properties of the different used bone graft substitutes modified from [78].
| Material | Component | Ca/P Index | Porosity (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cement | Calcibon ® | α-TCP, CaHPO4, CaCO3, pHA | 1.57 | 8 |
| Biobon ® | α-TCP, DCPD | 1.45 | 50–60 | |
| Norian SRS ® | α-TCP, CaCO3, MCPM | 1.67 | ||
| Granules | Algipore ® | Coraline HA | 1.8–2.15 | 75–80 |
| BioOss ® | Bovine HA | 2.03 | 59.7 | |
| ChronOs ® | β-TCP | 1.5 | 60 | |
| Endobon ® | Bovine HA | 1.67 | 45–85 |
HA: hydroxyapatite, pHA: precipitated hydroxyapatite, TCP: tricalcium phosphate, DCPD: dicalcium phosphate dihydrate, and MCPM: monocalcium phosphate monohydrate.