Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      In Vivo Analysis of the Biocompatibility and Macrophage Response of a Non-Resorbable PTFE Membrane for Guided Bone Regeneration

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The use of non-resorbable polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) membranes is indicated for the treatment of large, non-self-containing bone defects, or multi-walled defects in the case of vertical augmentations. However, less is known about the molecular basis of the foreign body response to PTFE membranes. In the present study, the inflammatory tissue responses to a novel high-density PTFE (dPTFE) barrier membrane have preclinically been evaluated using the subcutaneous implantation model in BALB/c mice by means of histopathological and histomorphometrical analysis methods and immunohistochemical detection of M1- and M2-macrophages. A collagen membrane was used as the control material. The results of the present study demonstrate that the tissue response to the dPTFE membrane involves inflammatory macrophages, but comparable cell numbers were also detected in the implant beds of the control collagen membrane, which is known to be biocompatible. Although these data indicate that the analyzed dPTFE membrane is not fully bioinert, but its biocompatibility is comparable to collagen-based membranes. Based on its optimal biocompatibility, the novel dPTFE barrier membrane may optimally support bone healing within the context of guided bone regeneration (GBR).

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Review collagen-based biomaterials for wound healing.

          With its wide distribution in soft and hard connective tissues, collagen is the most abundant of animal proteins. In vitro, natural collagen can be formed into highly organized, three-dimensional scaffolds that are intrinsically biocompatible, biodegradable, nontoxic upon exogenous application, and endowed with high tensile strength. These attributes make collagen the material of choice for wound healing and tissue engineering applications. In this article, we review the structure and molecular interactions of collagen in vivo; the recent use of natural collagen in sponges, injectables, films and membranes, dressings, and skin grafts; and the on-going development of synthetic collagen mimetic peptides as pylons to anchor cytoactive agents in wound beds.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Biomaterial based modulation of macrophage polarization: a review and suggested design principles

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Macrophage phenotype and remodeling outcomes in response to biologic scaffolds with and without a cellular component.

              Recently, macrophages have been characterized as having an M1 or M2 phenotype based on receptor expression, cytokine and effector molecule production, and function. The effects of macrophage phenotype upon tissue remodeling following the implantation of a biomaterial are largely unknown. The objectives of this study were to determine the effects of a cellular component within an implanted extracellular matrix (ECM) scaffold upon macrophage phenotype, and to determine the relationship between macrophage phenotype and tissue remodeling. Partial-thickness defects in the abdominal wall musculature of Sprague-Dawley rats were repaired with autologous body wall tissue, acellular allogeneic rat body wall ECM, xenogeneic pig urinary bladder tissue, or acellular xenogeneic pig urinary bladder ECM. At 3, 7, 14, and 28 days the host tissue response was characterized using histologic, immunohistochemical, and RT-PCR methods. The acellular test articles were shown to elicit a predominantly M2 type response and resulted in constructive remodeling, while those containing a cellular component, even an autologous cellular component, elicited a predominantly M1 type response and resulted in deposition of dense connective tissue and/or scarring. We conclude that the presence of cellular material within an ECM scaffold modulates the phenotype of the macrophages participating in the host response following implantation, and that the phenotype of the macrophages participating in the host response appears to be related to tissue remodeling outcome.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Mol Sci
                Int J Mol Sci
                ijms
                International Journal of Molecular Sciences
                MDPI
                1422-0067
                27 September 2018
                October 2018
                : 19
                : 10
                : 2952
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Section for Regenerative Orofacial Medicine, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany; tadaskorzinskas@ 123456yahoo.de (T.K.); ol.jung@ 123456uke.de (O.J.); r.smeets@ 123456uke.de (R.S.)
                [2 ]Institute of Biology and Human Genetics, Department for Cell and Tissue Engineering, University of Niš, Faculty of Medicine, 18106 Niš, Serbia; s.sanja88@ 123456gmail.com (S.S.); stevo.najman@ 123456gmail.com (S.N.)
                [3 ]Clinic of Small Animals, c/o Institute of Veterinary Anatomy, Histology and Embryology, Justus Liebig University of Giessen, 35390 Giessen, Germany; Kristina.Glenske@ 123456vetmed.uni-giessen.de (K.G.); Sabine.Wenisch@ 123456vetmed.uni-giessen.de (S.W.)
                [4 ]Department of Osteology and Biomechanics, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany; hahn@ 123456uke.de
                [5 ]University Medical Center, Justus Liebig University of Giessen, 35390 Giessen, Germany; reiner.schnettler@ 123456mac.com
                [6 ]BerlinAnalytix GmbH, 12109 Berlin, Germany
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: mike.barbeck@ 123456icloud.com ; Tel.: +49-17681022467
                [†]

                These authors contributed equally to this work.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9366-9894
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3001-1347
                Article
                ijms-19-02952
                10.3390/ijms19102952
                6213856
                30262765
                c94b34c2-5985-4aaa-899b-6a50852ab55a
                © 2018 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 24 August 2018
                : 25 September 2018
                Categories
                Article

                Molecular biology
                ptfe membrane,collagen membrane,biocompatibility,tissue reaction,inflammation,macrophage,m1,m2

                Comments

                Comment on this article