Produção Nacional
Revisado por pares
Foreign Body Reaction Associated with PET and PET/Chitosan Electrospun Nanofibrous Abdominal Meshes
2014; Public Library of Science; Volume: 9; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1371/journal.pone.0095293
ISSN1932-6203
AutoresBeatriz Veleirinho, Daniela Sousa Coelho, Paulo Fernando Dias, Marcelo Maraschin, Rúbia Pinto, Eduardo Cargnin‐Ferreira, Ana Peixoto, José Antonio Ribeiro de Souza, Rosa Maria Ribeiro‐do‐Valle, José A. Lopes‐da‐Silva,
Tópico(s)Intestinal and Peritoneal Adhesions
ResumoElectrospun materials have been widely explored for biomedical applications because of their advantageous characteristics, i.e., tridimensional nanofibrous structure with high surface-to-volume ratio, high porosity, and pore interconnectivity. Furthermore, considering the similarities between the nanofiber networks and the extracellular matrix (ECM), as well as the accepted role of changes in ECM for hernia repair, electrospun polymer fiber assemblies have emerged as potential materials for incisional hernia repair. In this work, we describe the application of electrospun non-absorbable mats based on poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) in the repair of abdominal defects, comparing the performance of these meshes with that of a commercial polypropylene mesh and a multifilament PET mesh. PET and PET/chitosan electrospun meshes revealed good performance during incisional hernia surgery, post-operative period, and no evidence of intestinal adhesion was found. The electrospun meshes were flexible with high suture retention, showing tensile strengths of 3 MPa and breaking strains of 8–33%. Nevertheless, a significant foreign body reaction (FBR) was observed in animals treated with the nanofibrous materials. Animals implanted with PET and PET/chitosan electrospun meshes (fiber diameter of 0.71±0.28 µm and 3.01±0.72 µm, respectively) showed, respectively, foreign body granuloma formation, averaging 4.2-fold and 7.4-fold greater than the control commercial mesh group (Marlex). Many foreign body giant cells (FBGC) involving nanofiber pieces were also found in the PET and PET/chitosan groups (11.9 and 19.3 times more FBGC than control, respectively). In contrast, no important FBR was observed for PET microfibers (fiber diameter = 18.9±0.21 µm). Therefore, we suggest that the reduced dimension and the high surface-to-volume ratio of the electrospun fibers caused the FBR reaction, pointing out the need for further studies to elucidate the mechanisms underlying interactions between cells/tissues and nanofibrous materials in order to gain a better understanding of the implantation risks associated with nanostructured biomaterials.
Referência(s)