4.4 Article

Glycidyl methacrylate-crosslinked fish swim bladder as a novel cardiovascular biomaterial with improved antithrombotic and anticalcification properties

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOMATERIALS APPLICATIONS
卷 36, 期 7, 页码 1188-1200

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/08853282211054205

关键词

Swim bladder; radical polymerization; antithrombotic; anticalcification; cardiovascular material

资金

  1. Applied Basic Research of Science and Technology Projects of Sichuan Province [2018JY0538]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31700833]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study demonstrated that platelet adhesion decreased by 35% in GMA-crosslinked swim bladders compared to glutaraldehyde-crosslinked ones. The superior anticoagulant property of GMA-SBs was further confirmed in the ex vivo arteriovenous shunt assay. Subcutaneous implantation in rats showed that GMA-SBs effectively inhibited calcification compared to GLUT-SBs.
At present, commercial artificial biological valves are mostly prepared by crosslinking bovine or porcine pericardia with glutaraldehyde. Swim bladder has similar components and lower immunogenicity compared to bovine or porcine pericardium. In this study, we used a glycidyl methacrylate (GMA)-based radical polymerization method to crosslink decellularized swim bladders. Amino and carboxyl groups in the swim bladder were reacted with epoxy groups on GMA to introduce carbon-carbon double bonds to the swim bladder. The results showed that the platelet adhesion of GMA-crosslinked swim bladders (GMA-SBs) decreased by 35%, as compared to that of glutaraldehyde-crosslinked swim bladders (GLUT-SBs). Moreover, the superior anticoagulant property was further verified by the ex vivo arteriovenous shunt assay. Meanwhile, the subcutaneous implantation in rats showed that GMA-SBs were able to effectively inhibit the calcification compared with GLUT-SBs. In conclusion, GMA-SBs showed improved antithrombotic and anticalcification properties compared to GLUT-SBs.

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