4.5 Article

Neutrophil survival on biomaterials is determined by surface topography

期刊

JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY
卷 37, 期 5, 页码 1082-1090

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1067/mva.2003.160

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Cardiovascular device-centered infections are a major cause of hospital morbidity, mortality, and expense. Caused by opportunistic bacteria, this phenomenon is thought to arise because of a defect in neutrophil bacterial killing. We have shown that neutrophils that adhere to polystyrene remain viable, whereas neutrophils that adhere to the vascular biomaterials expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) and Dacron undergo a rapid nonapoptotic death. This study was designed to test the hypothesis that surface topography is a determinant of the nonapoptotic death response of neutrophils to biomaterials. Methods. We took advantage of the ease with which a polystyrene surface can be manipulated to examine the effect of surface topography on neutrophil viability. Neutrophils were exposed to smooth or roughened polystyrene surfaces both in vivo and in vitro. Changes in cell membrane permeability and production of reactive oxygen species by individual cells were monitored with fluorescent dyes. Results. Host cells and isolated human neutrophils died rapidly after adhesion to roughened polystyrene. Neutrophils adherent to roughened surfaces produced more reactive oxygen intermediates than those adherent to smooth surfaces and were first to die. The cell death response precipitated by expanded polytetrafluoroethylene, Dacron, or the roughened surfaces was significantly reduced with treatment of the neutrophils with catalase, diphenylene iodonium, or the src kinase inhibitor PP2 before adhesion. Conclusions. Neutrophil adhesion to roughened materials triggers rapid production of reactive oxygen species and precipitates a nonapoptotic cell death. Understanding the material properties that trigger these responses is essential to development of the next generation of implantable biomaterials.

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

4.5
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