10.1007/s40204-014-0027-6

Invivo biocompatibility determination of acellular aortic matrix of buffalo origin

HTML PDF
  • Devarathnam Jetty*1,
  • Ashok Kumar Sharma1,
  • Naveen Kumar1,
  • Sameer Shrivastava2,
  • B. Sonal2,
  • R. B. Rai3,
  1. Division of Surgery, Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Uttar Pradesh, 243122, IN
  2. Division of Veterinary Biotechnology, Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Uttar Pradesh, 243122, IN
  3. Division of Pathology, Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Uttar Pradesh, 243122, IN
Cover Image

Published in Issue 2014-09-23

How to Cite

Jetty, D., Sharma, A. K., Kumar, N., Shrivastava, S., Sonal, B., & Rai, R. B. (2014). Invivo biocompatibility determination of acellular aortic matrix of buffalo origin. Progress in Biomaterials, 3(2-4 (December 2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40204-014-0027-6
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

Abstract In the present study, biocompatibility of native, acellular, 1,4-butanediol diglycidylether and 1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethyl aminopropyl carbodiimide (EDC) cross-linked acellular aortic grafts was evaluated following subcutaneous implantation in guinea pigs. Biocompatibility was evaluated based on macroscopic, histopathological observations and immune responses elicited by the implanted grafts. Results showed that macroscopically, no abnormal cellular reaction was observed at the host–graft junction in any of the implanted animals. Histopathological observations revealed that the inflammatory response was mild during first 15 days post-implantation and increased at 30 days post-implantation in acellular and cross-linked tissues. By day 60, marked ingrowth of host tissue was observed in EDC cross-linked acellular aortic grafts. ELISA and lymphocyte proliferation assay revealed that animals implanted with EDC grafts showed least immune response when compared to others. Therefore, it was concluded that EDC cross-linked acellular aortic grafts were more compatible and had better handling qualities than the other cross-linked grafts.

Keywords

  • Acellular matrix,
  • Acellular aortic matrix,
  • Buffalo aortic matrix,
  • BDDGE,
  • EDC
HTML PDF

References

  1. Badylak (2004) Xenogeneic extracellular matrix as a scaffold for tissue reconstruction (pp. 367-377) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trim.2003.12.016
  2. Bellows et al. (2008) Blood vessel matrix: a new alternative for abdominal wall reconstruction (pp. 351-358) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-008-0340-x
  3. Chevallay and Herbage (2000) Collagen-based biomaterials as 3-D scaffold for cell cultures: applications for tissue engineering and gene therapy (pp. 211-218) https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02344779
  4. Courtman et al. (1994) Development of a pericardial acellular matrix biomaterial—biochemical and mechanical effects of cell extraction (pp. 655-666) https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820280602
  5. Devarathnam et al. (2014) In vitro biocompatibility determination of acellular aortic matrix of buffalo origin (pp. 92-98)
  6. Dewangan et al. (2012) In vivo determination of biocompatibility of bladder acellular matrix in a rabbit model (pp. 43-55)
  7. Gendler et al. (1984) Toxic reactions evoked by glutaraldehyde-fixed pericardium and cardiac valve tissue bioprosthesis (pp. 727-736) https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820180703
  8. Gilberto and Pereira (2003) A study on biocompatibility and integration of acellular polyanionic collagen: elastin matrices by soft tissue (pp. 167-173)
  9. Hardin-Young et al. (1996) Modification of native collagen reduces antigenicity but preserves cell compatibility (pp. 675-682) https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0290(19960320)49:6<675::AID-BIT9>3.0.CO;2-L
  10. Lee et al. (1996) Crosslinking of tissue derived biomaterials in 1-ethyl-3-(dimethyl amino propyl)-carbodiimide 7(9) (pp. 531-542) https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00122176
  11. Lu et al. (1998) Heparinization on pericardial substitutes can reduce adhesion and pericardial inflammation in the dog (pp. 1111-1120) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5223(98)70411-8
  12. Malone et al. (1984) Detergent-extracted small diameter vascular prosthesis (pp. 181-191) https://doi.org/10.1016/0741-5214(84)90197-6
  13. Nahabedian (2007) Does alloderm stretch? (pp. 1276-1280) https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000279342.48795.9a
  14. Nimni et al. (1987) Chemically modified collagen a natural biomaterials for tissue replacement (pp. 741-771) https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820210606
  15. O’Brien et al. (1984) Immunological reactivity to a new tanned bovine pericardial heart valve (pp. 440-444)
  16. Ruszezak (2003) Effect of collagen matrices on dermal wound healing (pp. 1595-1611) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2003.08.003
  17. Schmidt and Baier (2000) Acellular vascular tissue: natural biomaterials for tissue repair and tissue engineering (pp. 2215-2231) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00148-4
  18. Seddon et al. (2004) Membrane proteins, lipids and detergents: not just a soap opera (pp. 105-117) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbamem.2004.04.011
  19. Shoukry et al. (1997) Commercial polyester fabric repair of abdominal hernias and defects (pp. 606-607) https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.140.23.606
  20. Silver et al. (1988) Microelectrode studies on the acid microenvironment beneath macrophages and osteoclasts (pp. 266-276) https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-4827(88)90191-7
  21. Snedecor and Cochran (1973) (pp. 286-287) Iowa State University Press
  22. Tyrell et al. (1989) Absorbable versus permanent mesh in abdominal operations (pp. 227-232)
  23. Wilson et al. (1995) Acellular matrix: a biomaterials approach for coronary artery by pass and heart valve replacement 60(Suppl2) https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4975(95)98967-Y
  24. Yannas et al. (1996) Natural materials (pp. 84-89) Academic Press