4.5 Article

Biocompatibility of a PDMS-coated micro-device: Bladder volume monitoring sensor

期刊

CHINESE JOURNAL OF POLYMER SCIENCE
卷 30, 期 2, 页码 242-249

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10118-012-1119-1

关键词

Dimethylpolysiloxane; Devices; Biocompatibility testing

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [2009-0082114]
  2. Ministry of Health Welfare [A090481]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2009-0082114] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We evaluated the biocompatibility of a dimethylpolysiloxane-coated micro-device which had been designed for monitoring real-time bladder volume in previous studies. The extract assay with dimethylpolysiloxane which had been used for coating the micro-device to measure the bladder volume was performed as an in vitro cytotoxicity test. For in vivo biocompatibility testing, the inflammatory responses around the implantation site of the micro-device in subcutaneous tissue of rat were assessed by light microscope with H&E stain and fluorescence microscope with ED1 stain and von Willebrand factor stain. The averages of cell viability in dimethylpolysiloxane group were 84.6% and 82.3% at 24 h and 72 h incubation, respectively. The qualitative evaluations with light and fluorescence microscope revealed that the inflammatory changes peaked during 2 weeks but almost disappeared at 4 weeks after implantation of devices. The quantitative evaluations for granulation layer formation and neovascularization showed that the thickness of the layer in dimethylpolysiloxane group peaked during 2 weeks but it came to be stabilized at 4 weeks as thin as at 2 weeks in control group, and the frequency of neovascularization was higher in dimethylpolysiloxane group than in control group but it was not increased with time. The dimethylpolysiloxane-coated micro-device is thought be a reliable bio-medical device.

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