Literature DB >> 8159421

Soft-tissue response to synthetic biomaterials.

J M Morehead1, G R Holt.   

Abstract

The soft-tissue response to an implanted synthetic material is an inflammatory reaction to foreign body; factors that minimize this inflammation will maximize biocompatibility. The ideal implant is selected from a material that is non-toxic, nonantigenic and in chemical proximity to calcium or carbon on the periodic table. If it is porous, the pores should be large enough to admit immune and phagocytic cells and ideally, to allow native tissue ingrowth. The implant should be of appropriate size and shape and should be implanted in the correct location. The material should be nonparticulate, should resist fragmentation, and should be secured in the selected location after gentle insertion. All these factors help decrease the body's natural response to an implanted foreign body, but inflammation and foreign body reaction are the common threads in all responses to all implanted synthetic materials. Optimum soft-tissue biocompatibility, characterized either by thin fibrous encapsulation or by mesenchymal ingrowth into pores and interstices, is achieved by avoiding or containing this response.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8159421

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otolaryngol Clin North Am        ISSN: 0030-6665            Impact factor:   3.346


  10 in total

1.  Mice that lack the angiogenesis inhibitor, thrombospondin 2, mount an altered foreign body reaction characterized by increased vascularity.

Authors:  T R Kyriakides; K J Leach; A S Hoffman; B D Ratner; P Bornstein
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1999-04-13       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  In vivo comparison of suburethral sling materials.

Authors:  M Slack; J S Sandhu; D R Staskin; R C Grant
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2005-07-02

3.  Three-dimensional tissue-engineered skeletal muscle for laryngeal reconstruction.

Authors:  Sarah Brookes; Sherry Voytik-Harbin; Hongji Zhang; Stacey Halum
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2017-08-26       Impact factor: 3.325

4.  Characterization of the Foreign Body Response to Common Surgical Biomaterials in a Murine Model.

Authors:  Mohamed Ibrahim; Jennifer Bond; Manuel A Medina; Lei Chen; Carlos Quiles; George Kokosis; Latif Bashirov; Bruce Klitzman; Howard Levinson
Journal:  Eur J Plast Surg       Date:  2017-04-28

5.  Mesh infection without erosion after ObTape sling insertion: a diagnostic challenge.

Authors:  Sharif I M F Ismail
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2007-02-28

Review 6.  Synthetic slings: pros and cons.

Authors:  David R Staskin; Louis Plzak
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 2.862

Review 7.  Transvaginal retropubic sling systems: efficacy and patient acceptability.

Authors:  Christina P Moldovan; Michelle E Marinone; Andrea Staack
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2015-02-16

Review 8.  Fiber-reinforced scaffolds in soft tissue engineering.

Authors:  Baoqing Pei; Wei Wang; Yubo Fan; Xiumei Wang; Fumio Watari; Xiaoming Li
Journal:  Regen Biomater       Date:  2017-08-04

9.  Biocompatibility issues with modern implants in bone - a review for clinical orthopedics.

Authors:  Katja M R Nuss; Brigitte von Rechenberg
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2008-04-25

10.  An experimental research in mice on the "soft tissue reaction to 3 different mesh implants: Titanium silk, Parietene Progrip and Prolene".

Authors:  Viktor Eduardovich Kobazev; Manish Kumar Yadav; Andrey Vyacheslavovich Vasilyev; Alexander Ivanovich Nerobeev
Journal:  JPRAS Open       Date:  2018-08-03
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.