Zerris Vasilios A, James Kenneth S, Roberts Julie B, Bell Eugene, Heilman Carl B
Department of Neurosurgery, Tufts-New England Medical Center, 750 Washington Street, Box 178, Boston, Massachusetts 02111, USA.
J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2007 Nov;83(2):580-8. doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.30831.
We evaluated in a canine duraplasty model how specific differences in device physicomechanical properties, porosity, and crosslinking influenced the biological performance of three processed collagen dural substitutes.
Three collagen dural substitutes were studied: Dura-Guard, DuraGen, and Durepair. The initial strength, stiffness, and suture retention force were measured using standard mechanical test methods. The relative pore sizes of each device were assessed with a scanning electron microscope. Differential scanning calorimetry was used to measure their respective collagen denaturation temperatures. The biologic response and performance of the materials were evaluated via an acute (1 month) and long-term (3 and 6 months) canine bilateral duraplasty study.
The mechanical properties of Dura-Guard and Durepair were similar to native dura. We could not quantify the mechanical properties of DuraGen because of its fragile nature. The denaturation temperature of DuraGen and Dura-Guard differed significantly from that reported for native collagens. The denaturation temperature of Durepair was comparable with the values reported for native collagens. All three materials were tolerated well by the animals. DuraGen did not maintain its structural integrity beyond 1 month. Dura-Guard and Durepair persisted for 6 months. Durepair was populated by fibroblasts and blood vessels, whereas Dura-Guard was not.
The three dural substitutes tested were found to be safe and effective in healing surgically created defects in the dura mater. Although each of these dura substitutes are composed of collagen, differences in the collagen source and processing influenced device physicomechanical properties, porosity, and the nativity of the collagen polymer. These measured differences influenced device intraoperative handling and installation as well as the post-operative biological response, where differences in device resorption, cell penetration, vascularization, and collagen remodeling were observed.
我们在犬类硬脑膜成形术模型中评估了三种加工过的胶原硬脑膜替代物在器械物理机械性能、孔隙率和交联方面的特定差异如何影响其生物学性能。
研究了三种胶原硬脑膜替代物:Dura-Guard、DuraGen和Durepair。使用标准机械测试方法测量初始强度、刚度和缝线保持力。用扫描电子显微镜评估每个器械的相对孔径。差示扫描量热法用于测量它们各自的胶原变性温度。通过急性(1个月)和长期(3个月和6个月)犬双侧硬脑膜成形术研究评估材料的生物学反应和性能。
Dura-Guard和Durepair的机械性能与天然硬脑膜相似。由于DuraGen质地脆弱,我们无法量化其机械性能。DuraGen和Dura-Guard的变性温度与天然胶原报道的值有显著差异。Durepair的变性温度与天然胶原报道的值相当。所有三种材料在动物体内耐受性良好。DuraGen在1个月后无法保持其结构完整性。Dura-Guard和Durepair持续了6个月。Durepair有纤维母细胞和血管生长,而Dura-Guard没有。
测试的三种硬脑膜替代物在愈合手术造成的硬脑膜缺损方面被发现是安全有效的。尽管这些硬脑膜替代物均由胶原蛋白组成,但胶原蛋白来源和加工的差异影响了器械的物理机械性能、孔隙率和胶原聚合物的天然性。这些测量到的差异影响了器械的术中操作和安装以及术后生物学反应,在器械吸收、细胞穿透、血管化和胶原重塑方面观察到了差异。