4.8 Article

A nitric oxide releasing, self assembled peptide amphiphile matrix that mimics native endothelium for coating implantable cardiovascular devices

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 31, 期 7, 页码 1502-1508

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.10.051

关键词

Self-assembly; Nitric oxide; Endothelium; Vascular grafts; Peptide; Stents

资金

  1. Wallace H. Coulter Foundation
  2. NIBIB [T32EB004312]
  3. Caroline P. Ireland Research Scholarship
  4. NIH [HL71189, HL074391]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cardiovascular disease is the number one cause of death in the United States. Deployment of stents and vascular grafts has been a major therapeutic method for treatment. However, restenosis, incomplete endothelialization, and thrombosis hamper the long term clinical success. As a solution to meet these current challenges, we have developed a native endothelial ECM mimicking self-assembled nanofibrous matrix to serve as a new treatment model. The nanofibrous matrix is formed by self-assembly of peptide amphiphiles (PAs), which contain nitric oxide (NO) donating residues, endothelial cell adhesive ligands composed of YIGSR peptide sequence, and enzyme-mediated degradable sites. NO was successfully released from the nanofibrous matrix rapidly within 48 h, followed by sustained release over period of 30 days. The NO releasing nanofibrous matrix demonstrated a significantly enhanced proliferation of endothelial cells (51 +/- 3% to 67 +/- 2%) but reduced proliferation of smooth muscle cells (35 +/- 2% to 16 +/- 3%) after 48 h of incubation. There was also a 150-fold decrease in platelet attachment on the NO releasing nanofibrous matrix (470 +/- 220 platelets/cm(2)) compared to the collagen-I (73 +/- 22 x 10(3) platelets/cm2) coated surface. The nanofibrous matrix has the potential to be applied to various cardiovascular implants as a self-assembled coating, thereby providing a native endothelial extracellular matrix (ECM) mimicking environment. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.8
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