Evaluation of the biocompatibility and mechanical properties of xenogeneic (porcine) extracellular matrix (ECM) scaffold for pelvic reconstruction

Introduction and hypothesisXenogeneic (porcine) extracellular matrix (ECM) scaffolds have been suggested as ideal biomaterials for regeneration medicine; however, ECM prepared from different tissue sources has shown distinctive biological properties. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of biological characteristics of different tissue-derived ECM is essential in the design of scaffolds for pelvic reconstruction.MethodsWe compared the biological properties of ECM derived from different tissue sources of Bama miniature pigs as a pelvic biological patch in terms of histological structure, water absorption ability, biodegradation ability, mechanical properties, antimicrobial activity, and biocompatibility in vitro.ResultsDifferent ECM scaffolds have distinct structural differences, and all have good biocompatibility, and UBM exhibited better water uptake ability (above 500%), anti-biodegradation ability, mechanical properties, antimicrobial activity, and stem cell attachment properties than other tissue-derived ECM.ConclusionsPorcine UBM might serve as an ideal pelvic biological patch.

[1]  J. Nordenstam,et al.  Anatomical outcome and quality of life following posterior vaginal wall prolapse repair using collagen xenograft , 2005, International Urogynecology Journal.

[2]  R. Hancock,et al.  Cationic host defense (antimicrobial) peptides. , 2006, Current opinion in immunology.

[3]  M. Kesting,et al.  Host Defense Peptides in Wound Healing , 2008, Molecular medicine.

[4]  J. Fisher,et al.  Biomechanical characterization of decellularized and cross-linked bovine pericardium. , 2007, The Journal of heart valve disease.

[5]  Stephen F Badylak,et al.  Decellularization of tissues and organs. , 2006, Biomaterials.

[6]  S. Badylak,et al.  Effect of storage upon material properties of lyophilized porcine extracellular matrix derived from the urinary bladder. , 2006, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials.

[7]  S. Nuding,et al.  Antibacterial activity of human defensins on anaerobic intestinal bacterial species: a major role of HBD-3. , 2009, Microbes and infection.

[8]  Stephen F Badylak,et al.  The extracellular matrix as a biologic scaffold material. , 2007, Biomaterials.

[9]  H. Lee,et al.  Porcine small intestinal submucosa sheets as a scaffold for human bone marrow stem cells. , 2007, International journal of biological macromolecules.

[10]  M. Hiles,et al.  Effects of sterilization on an extracellular matrix scaffold: Part II. Bioactivity and matrix interaction , 2007, Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine.

[11]  Michael Ladisch,et al.  Antimicrobial activity associated with extracellular matrices. , 2002, Tissue engineering.

[12]  Y. Liu,et al.  In vitro anti-bacterial and biological properties of magnetron co-sputtered silver-containing hydroxyapatite coating. , 2006, Biomaterials.

[13]  R. Bareille,et al.  Physical and biological characteristics of the main biomaterials used in pelvic surgery. , 1992, Bio-medical materials and engineering.

[14]  James M. Anderson,et al.  Foreign body reaction to biomaterials. , 2008, Seminars in immunology.

[15]  Ann E Rundell,et al.  Biaxial strength of multilaminated extracellular matrix scaffolds. , 2004, Biomaterials.

[16]  Stephen F Badylak,et al.  The basement membrane component of biologic scaffolds derived from extracellular matrix. , 2006, Tissue engineering.

[17]  V. Khullar,et al.  Surgical repair of vaginal prolapse: a gynaecological hernia. , 2006, International journal of surgery.

[18]  Stephen F Badylak,et al.  Maintenance of hepatic sinusoidal endothelial cell phenotype in vitro using organ-specific extracellular matrix scaffolds. , 2007, Tissue engineering.

[19]  J. Coburn,et al.  Biaxial mechanical evaluation of cholecyst-derived extracellular matrix: a weakly anisotropic potential tissue engineered biomaterial. , 2007, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[20]  M. Harmsen,et al.  Cellular and molecular dynamics in the foreign body reaction. , 2006, Tissue engineering.

[21]  Stephen F Badylak,et al.  Antibacterial activity within degradation products of biological scaffolds composed of extracellular matrix. , 2006, Tissue engineering.

[22]  K. Kobashi,et al.  Complications of grafts used in female pelvic floor reconstruction: Mesh erosion and extrusion , 2007, Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India.

[23]  E. D. Cuyper,et al.  Pelvic organ prolapse repair with Prolift ® mesh: a prospective study , 2009 .

[24]  James M. Anderson,et al.  Biological Responses to Materials , 2001 .

[25]  Buddy D Ratner,et al.  Surface characterization of extracellular matrix scaffolds. , 2010, Biomaterials.

[26]  Stephen F Badylak,et al.  Xenogeneic extracellular matrix as a scaffold for tissue reconstruction. , 2004, Transplant immunology.

[27]  Takaaki Ohtake,et al.  Biology and clinical relevance of naturally occurring antimicrobial peptides. , 2002, The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology.

[28]  L. Ge,et al.  Comparison of histological structure and biocompatibility between human acellular dermal matrix (ADM) and porcine ADM. , 2009, Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries.

[29]  S. Badylak,et al.  Oxygen diffusivity of biologic and synthetic scaffold materials for tissue engineering. , 2009, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[30]  G. R. Rideal,et al.  Flexible inorganic films and coatings , 1983 .