4.1 Article

An Elastomeric Patch Electrospun from a Blended Solution of Dermal Extracellular Matrix and Biodegradable Polyurethane for Rat Abdominal Wall Repair

期刊

TISSUE ENGINEERING PART C-METHODS
卷 18, 期 2, 页码 122-132

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/ten.tec.2011.0295

关键词

-

资金

  1. Armed Forces Institute for Regenerative Medicine [W81XWH-08-2-0032]
  2. NIH [ROI HL-068816]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A biodegradable elastomeric scaffold was created by electrospinning a mixed solution of poly(ester urethane)urea (PEUU) and porcine dermal extracellular matrix (dECM) digest, with PEUU included to provide elasticity, flexibility, and mechanical support and dECM used to enhance bioactivity and biocompatibility. Micrographs and differential scanning calorimetry demonstrated partial miscibility between PEUU and dECM. With greater dECM content, scaffolds were found to possess lower breaking strains and suture retention strength, although initial modulus was greater with higher dECM concentrations. The hybrid scaffolds containing 0% to 50% dECM had tensile strengths of 5 to 7 MPa, breaking strains of 138% to 611%, initial moduli of 3 to 11 Mpa, and suture retention strengths of 35 to 59 MPa. When hydrated, scaffolds were found to contract markedly with 50% dECM content. When used in a rat full-thickness abdominal wall replacement model, no herniation, infection, or tissue adhesion was observed after 4 and 8 weeks with a scaffold containing 25% dECM or a control 100% PEUU scaffold. Scaffolds incorporating dECM were significantly thicker at the time of explant, with greater numbers of associated smooth muscle actin positive staining cells than in the control, but minimal cellular infiltration and remodeling of the scaffold were detected regardless of dECM addition. The processing of dECM and PEUU from a mixed solution thus provided a scaffold with evidence of better bioactivity and with mechanical properties not achievable with digested dECM alone.

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

4.1
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