4.8 Article

The role of pore size on vascularization and tissue remodeling in PEG hydrogels

Journal

BIOMATERIALS
Volume 32, Issue 26, Pages 6045-6051

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.04.066

Keywords

Porous; Poly (ethylene glycol); Vascularization; Hydrogels

Funding

  1. Veterans Administration
  2. National Science Foundation [0852048, 0731201]
  3. Taiwan National Science Council [98-2314-B-182-015-MY3]
  4. Div Of Engineering Education and Centers
  5. Directorate For Engineering [0852048] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Vascularization is influenced by the physical architecture of a biomaterial. The relationship between pore size and vascularization has been examined for hydrophobic polymer foams, but there has been little research on tissue response in porous hydrogels. The goal of this study was to examine the role of pore size on vessel invasion in porous poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) hydrogels. Vascularized tissue ingrowth was examined using three-dimensional cell culture and rodent models. In culture, all porous gels supported vascular invasion with the rate increasing with pore size. Following subfascia implantation, porous gels rapidly absorbed wound fluid, which promoted tissue ingrowth even in the absence of exogenous growth factors. Pore size influenced neovascularization, within the scaffolds and also the overall tissue response. Cell and vessel invasion into gels with pores 25-50 mu m in size was limited to the external surface, while gels with pores larger pores (50-100 and 100-150 mu m) permitted mature vascularized tissue formation throughout the entire material volume. A thin layer of inflammatory tissue was present at all PEG-tissue interfaces, effectively reducing the area available for tissue growth. These results show that porous PEG hydrogels can support extensive vascularized tissue formation, but the nature of the response depends on the pore size. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available