| Literature DB >> 36035951 |
Naohiro Wakabayashi1, Takumi Yoshida2, Kyohei Oyama1, Daisuke Naruse3, Masahiro Tsutsui1, Yuta Kikuchi1, Daisuke Koga4, Hiroyuki Kamiya1.
Abstract
The low patency of synthetic vascular grafts hinders their practical applicability. Polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) is a non-toxic, highly hydrophilic polymer; thus, we created a PVA-coated polycaprolactone (PCL) nanofiber vascular graft (PVA-PCL graft). In this study, we examine whether PVA could improve the hydrophilicity of PCL grafts and evaluate its in vivo performance using a rat aorta implantation model. A PCL graft with an inner diameter of 1 mm is created using electrospinning (control). The PCL nanofibers are coated with PVA, resulting in a PVA-PCL graft. Mechanical property tests demonstrate that the PVA coating significantly increases the stiffness and resilience of the PCL graft. The PVA-PCL surface exhibits a much smaller sessile drop contact angle when compared with that of the control, indicating that the PVA coating has hydrophilic properties. Additionally, the PVA-PCL graft shows significantly less platelet adsorption than the control. The proposed PVA-PCL graft is implanted into the rat's abdominal aorta, and its in vivo performance is tested at 8 weeks. The patency rate is 83.3% (10/12). The histological analysis demonstrates autologous cell engraftment on and inside the scaffold, as well as CD31/α-smooth muscle positive neointima regeneration on the graft lumen. Thus, the PVA-PCL grafts exhibit biocompatibility in the rat model, which suggests that the PVA coating is a promising approach for functionalizing PCL.Entities:
Keywords: nanofiber; platelet adhesion; polycaprolactone (PCL); polyvinyl alcohol; small vascular graft
Year: 2022 PMID: 36035951 PMCID: PMC9403249 DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.946899
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med ISSN: 2297-055X
FIGURE 1Fabrication of PVA–PCL graft with 1 mm inner diameter. (A) Scheme of PCL graft preparation and PVA coating. (B) PVA–PCL graft. (C) Cross-section of PVA–PCL graft by SEM imaging. (D) Comparison of the luminal surface structure before and after PVA coating.
FIGURE 2Evaluation of mechanical properties of PVA–PCL graft. (A) Handleability test. Grafts were pinched with forceps 5 times and the resulting change in structure was captured. (B) Stress–strain curve measured using KES. Grafts were compressed with a maximum force of 50 gf/cm2 and the distance between compression and recovery was measured using a compression tester. Independent measurements were repeated 5 times and the figure shows the representative data. (C) Quantification of mechanical properties measured by KES. WC represents susceptibility against compression. Higher value of RC and smaller T0–TM represents resiliency and recoverability. The graphs are expressed as the mean ± SD and the data points represent the individual values in each group. ∗Denotes p < 0.05.
FIGURE 3Hydrophilicity and platelet adhesion tests. (A) Hydrophilicity test. The hydrophilicity of the control and PVA–PCL surfaces was measured through the sessile drop contact angle method. The sessile drop was imaged using an angle meter. Independent measurements were repeated five times, and the representative images from each group are shown on the left. Three grafts were soaked in PBS, and the results are shown at the center of the figure. The contact angle results are shown on the right. The graphs are expressed as mean ± SD, and the data points represent the individual values in each group. ∗Represents p < 0.05. (B) Platelet adhesion test. Human plasma was passed through the grafts. After flushing with PBS, the adsorbed platelets were imaged using SEM. The independent tests were repeated five times, and the representative images are shown on the left. Numerical results are shown on the right. The graphs are expressed as the mean ± SD, and the data points represent the individual values in each group. ∗Represents p < 0.05.
FIGURE 4In vivo evaluation of PVA–PCL graft performance. (A) Patency rate. PVA–PCL grafts were implanted into rat (n = 12). Patency was determined after 8 weeks. (B) Appearance of explanted graft. Macroscopic appearance (upper left). Cross-sectional HE images: low magnification (lower left) and 400X (right). (C) Neointima images after immunofluorescence staining. Endothelial cell marker CD31 (green) and smooth muscle cell marker αSM (red) were used for immunostaining. The nucleus was counter-stained with Hoechst (blue). All harvested grafts were immunostained, and representative data are shown here. Higher magnification images of a cross-sectional graft are shown at the top, and an end-to-end graft image is shown at the bottom with low magnification. (D) Quantification of the neointimal thickness measured using cross-sectional HE images. The data are expressed as mean ± SD, and the data points represent the individual values in each group.