Comparison of two porcine-derived materials for repairing abdominal wall defects in rats.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the mechanical properties, host responses and incorporation of porcine small intestine submucosa (PSIS) and porcine acellular dermal matrix (PADM) in a rat model of abdominal wall defect repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prior to implantation, PSIS an...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zhengni Liu, Rui Tang, Zhiyuan Zhou, Zhicheng Song, Huichun Wang, Yan Gu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2011-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3102734?pdf=render
_version_ 1818327561336258560
author Zhengni Liu
Rui Tang
Zhiyuan Zhou
Zhicheng Song
Huichun Wang
Yan Gu
author_facet Zhengni Liu
Rui Tang
Zhiyuan Zhou
Zhicheng Song
Huichun Wang
Yan Gu
author_sort Zhengni Liu
collection DOAJ
description OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the mechanical properties, host responses and incorporation of porcine small intestine submucosa (PSIS) and porcine acellular dermal matrix (PADM) in a rat model of abdominal wall defect repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prior to implantation, PSIS and PADM were prepared and evaluated in terms of structure and mechanical properties. Full-thickness abdominal wall defects were created in 50 Sprague-Dawley rats, and were repaired using either PSIS or PADM. Rats were sacrificed 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12 weeks post-repair and examined for herniation, infection, adhesions, contraction, and changes in the thickness and strength of the tissues incorporated at the defect sites. Histopathology and immunohistochemistry were performed to analyze inflammatory responses, collagen deposition and vascularization. RESULTS: PADM showed more dense collagen deposition and stronger mechanical properties than PSIS prior to implantation (P<0.01). However, the mechanical properties observed after integration with the surrounding native tissues was similar for PADM and PSIS. Both PADM and PSIS showed significant contraction by week 12. However, PADM tissue induced less adhesion and increased in thickness more slowly, and showed less infiltration by foreign giant cells, polymorphonuclear cells, and mononuclear cells. Improved remodeling of host tissue was observed after PSIS implantation, which was apparent from the orientation of bands of fibrous connective tissue, intermixed with newly formed blood vessels by Week 12. CONCLUSION: PSIS showed weaker mechanical properties prior to implantation. However, after implantation PSIS induced more pronounced host responses and showed better incorporation into host tissues than PADM.
first_indexed 2024-12-13T12:18:14Z
format Article
id doaj.art-e0f155ae14704aae8313b0cb607c5434
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1932-6203
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-13T12:18:14Z
publishDate 2011-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj.art-e0f155ae14704aae8313b0cb607c54342022-12-21T23:46:39ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032011-01-0165e2052010.1371/journal.pone.0020520Comparison of two porcine-derived materials for repairing abdominal wall defects in rats.Zhengni LiuRui TangZhiyuan ZhouZhicheng SongHuichun WangYan GuOBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the mechanical properties, host responses and incorporation of porcine small intestine submucosa (PSIS) and porcine acellular dermal matrix (PADM) in a rat model of abdominal wall defect repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prior to implantation, PSIS and PADM were prepared and evaluated in terms of structure and mechanical properties. Full-thickness abdominal wall defects were created in 50 Sprague-Dawley rats, and were repaired using either PSIS or PADM. Rats were sacrificed 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12 weeks post-repair and examined for herniation, infection, adhesions, contraction, and changes in the thickness and strength of the tissues incorporated at the defect sites. Histopathology and immunohistochemistry were performed to analyze inflammatory responses, collagen deposition and vascularization. RESULTS: PADM showed more dense collagen deposition and stronger mechanical properties than PSIS prior to implantation (P<0.01). However, the mechanical properties observed after integration with the surrounding native tissues was similar for PADM and PSIS. Both PADM and PSIS showed significant contraction by week 12. However, PADM tissue induced less adhesion and increased in thickness more slowly, and showed less infiltration by foreign giant cells, polymorphonuclear cells, and mononuclear cells. Improved remodeling of host tissue was observed after PSIS implantation, which was apparent from the orientation of bands of fibrous connective tissue, intermixed with newly formed blood vessels by Week 12. CONCLUSION: PSIS showed weaker mechanical properties prior to implantation. However, after implantation PSIS induced more pronounced host responses and showed better incorporation into host tissues than PADM.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3102734?pdf=render
spellingShingle Zhengni Liu
Rui Tang
Zhiyuan Zhou
Zhicheng Song
Huichun Wang
Yan Gu
Comparison of two porcine-derived materials for repairing abdominal wall defects in rats.
PLoS ONE
title Comparison of two porcine-derived materials for repairing abdominal wall defects in rats.
title_full Comparison of two porcine-derived materials for repairing abdominal wall defects in rats.
title_fullStr Comparison of two porcine-derived materials for repairing abdominal wall defects in rats.
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of two porcine-derived materials for repairing abdominal wall defects in rats.
title_short Comparison of two porcine-derived materials for repairing abdominal wall defects in rats.
title_sort comparison of two porcine derived materials for repairing abdominal wall defects in rats
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3102734?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT zhengniliu comparisonoftwoporcinederivedmaterialsforrepairingabdominalwalldefectsinrats
AT ruitang comparisonoftwoporcinederivedmaterialsforrepairingabdominalwalldefectsinrats
AT zhiyuanzhou comparisonoftwoporcinederivedmaterialsforrepairingabdominalwalldefectsinrats
AT zhichengsong comparisonoftwoporcinederivedmaterialsforrepairingabdominalwalldefectsinrats
AT huichunwang comparisonoftwoporcinederivedmaterialsforrepairingabdominalwalldefectsinrats
AT yangu comparisonoftwoporcinederivedmaterialsforrepairingabdominalwalldefectsinrats