4.5 Article

Biocompatibility of acellular human pericardium

Journal

JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH
Volume 143, Issue 2, Pages 407-414

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2007.01.026

Keywords

cardiac tissue engineering; ECM (extracellular matrix); scaffold; biocompatibility

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Previous studies have shown successful decellularization of human pericardium without affecting the major structural components and strength of the matrix. The aim of this study was to assess the biocompatibility and reseeding potential of the acellular human pericardial scaffold. Materials and methods. Pericardia were treated sequentially with hypotonic buffer, sodium dodecyl sulfate, and a nuclease solution. The presence of cellular attachment factors after decellularization was evaluated using immunohistochemistry. The scaffold was seeded with dermal fibroblasts and cellular attachment to and numbers of cells penetrating were assessed over time. Biocompatibility was also evaluated following subcutaneous implantation into a mouse model for three months. Results. After decellularization, the scaffold stained positively for fibronectin, but collagen IV and laminin staining was reduced. Seeded fibroblasts attached to the mesothelial surface and were visualized in the tissue within a week of seeding. The majority of fibroblasts in the tissue were viable and there was evidence of remodeling of the matrix. Analysis of the explanted tissues from mice showed that fresh/ frozen and glutaraldehyde-fixed pericardia were encapsulated with a thick layer of inflammatory cells and fibrous tissue. In contrast, the decellularized scaffold was infiltrated with myofibroblasts, CD34+ cells and macrophages, indicating a healthy repair process. Compared with the glutaraldehyde-fixed tissue, the calcium content of the fresh/frozen and decellularized pericardia was negligible. Conclusions. The pericardial scaffold was biocompatible in vitro and in the mouse model in vivo. (c) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available