4.4 Article

Complement activation by candidate biomaterials of an implantable microfabricated medical device

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.31855

关键词

immune response; sensor; complement; biocompatibility

资金

  1. Lifecare AS, Bergen, Norway
  2. Research Council of Norway [174392]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Implantable devices realized by microfabrication have introduced a new class of potential biomaterials whose properties would need to be assessed. Such devices include sensors for measuring biological substances like glucose. Thus, 14 different candidate materials intended for design of such a device were investigated with respect to their complement activation potential in human serum. The fluid-phase activation was measured by the products C4d, Bb, C3bc, and the terminal complement complex (TCC), whereas solidphase activation was measured by deposition of TCC on the material surfaces. No fluid-phase activation was found for materials related to the capsule, carrier, or sealing. Fluidphase activation was, however, triggered to a various extent in three of the four nanoporous membranes (cellulose, polyamide, and aluminium oxide), whereas polycarbonate was rendered inactive. Solid-phase activation discriminated more sensitively between all the materials, revealing that the capsule candidate polydimethylsiloxane and sealing candidate silicone 3140 were highly compatible, showing significantly lower TCC deposition than the negative control (p < 0.01). Three of the candidate materials were indifferent, whereas the remaining nine showed significantly higher deposition of TCC than the negative control (p < 0.01). In conclusion, complement activation, in particular when examined on the solid phase, discriminated well between the different candidate materials tested and could be used as a guide for the selection of the best-suited materials for further investigation and development of the device. (C) 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 98B: 323-329, 2011.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据