Gillian M. O'Connell, Nicholas Vernice, Alicia A. Matavosian, Leigh Slyker, Ryan J. Bender, Xue Dong, Lawrence J. Bonassar, James Shin, Jason A. Spector
{"title":"Customizable, biocompatible implants for dorsal nasal augmentation: An in vivo pilot study of eight polylactic acid scaffold designs","authors":"Gillian M. O'Connell, Nicholas Vernice, Alicia A. Matavosian, Leigh Slyker, Ryan J. Bender, Xue Dong, Lawrence J. Bonassar, James Shin, Jason A. Spector","doi":"10.1002/jbm.a.37764","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Augmentation of the nasal dorsum often requires implantation of structural material. Existing methods include autologous, cadaveric or alloplastic materials and injectable hydrogels. Each of these options is associated with considerable limitations. There is an ongoing need for precise and versatile implants that produce long-lasting craniofacial augmentation. Four separate polylactic acid (PLA) dorsal nasal implant designs were 3D-printed. Two implants had internal PLA rebar of differing porosities and two were designed as “shells” of differing porosities. Shell designs were implanted without infill or with either minced or zested processed decellularized ovine cartilage infill to serve as a “biologic rebar”, yielding eight total treatment groups. Scaffolds were implanted heterotopically on rat dorsa (<i>N</i> = 4 implants per rat) for explant after 3, 6, and 12 months followed by volumetric, histopathologic, and biomechanical analysis. Low porosity implants with either minced cartilage or PLA rebar infill had superior volume retention across all timepoints. Overall, histopathologic and immunohistochemical analysis showed a resolving inflammatory response with an M1/M2 ratio consistently favoring tissue regeneration over the study course. However, xenograft cartilage showed areas of degradation and pro-inflammatory infiltrate contributing to volume and contour loss over time. Biomechanical analysis revealed all constructs had equilibrium and instantaneous moduli higher than human septal cartilage controls. Biocompatible, degradable polymer implants can induce healthy neotissue ingrowth resulting in guided soft tissue augmentation and offer a simple, customizable and clinically-translatable alternative to existing craniofacial soft tissue augmentation materials. PLA-only implants may be superior to combination PLA and xenograft implants due to contour irregularities associated with cartilage degradation.</p>","PeriodicalId":15142,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A","volume":"112 12","pages":"2086-2097"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jbm.a.37764","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Augmentation of the nasal dorsum often requires implantation of structural material. Existing methods include autologous, cadaveric or alloplastic materials and injectable hydrogels. Each of these options is associated with considerable limitations. There is an ongoing need for precise and versatile implants that produce long-lasting craniofacial augmentation. Four separate polylactic acid (PLA) dorsal nasal implant designs were 3D-printed. Two implants had internal PLA rebar of differing porosities and two were designed as “shells” of differing porosities. Shell designs were implanted without infill or with either minced or zested processed decellularized ovine cartilage infill to serve as a “biologic rebar”, yielding eight total treatment groups. Scaffolds were implanted heterotopically on rat dorsa (N = 4 implants per rat) for explant after 3, 6, and 12 months followed by volumetric, histopathologic, and biomechanical analysis. Low porosity implants with either minced cartilage or PLA rebar infill had superior volume retention across all timepoints. Overall, histopathologic and immunohistochemical analysis showed a resolving inflammatory response with an M1/M2 ratio consistently favoring tissue regeneration over the study course. However, xenograft cartilage showed areas of degradation and pro-inflammatory infiltrate contributing to volume and contour loss over time. Biomechanical analysis revealed all constructs had equilibrium and instantaneous moduli higher than human septal cartilage controls. Biocompatible, degradable polymer implants can induce healthy neotissue ingrowth resulting in guided soft tissue augmentation and offer a simple, customizable and clinically-translatable alternative to existing craniofacial soft tissue augmentation materials. PLA-only implants may be superior to combination PLA and xenograft implants due to contour irregularities associated with cartilage degradation.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A is an international, interdisciplinary, English-language publication of original contributions concerning studies of the preparation, performance, and evaluation of biomaterials; the chemical, physical, toxicological, and mechanical behavior of materials in physiological environments; and the response of blood and tissues to biomaterials. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed articles on all relevant biomaterial topics including the science and technology of alloys,polymers, ceramics, and reprocessed animal and human tissues in surgery,dentistry, artificial organs, and other medical devices. The Journal also publishes articles in interdisciplinary areas such as tissue engineering and controlled release technology where biomaterials play a significant role in the performance of the medical device.
The Journal of Biomedical Materials Research is the official journal of the Society for Biomaterials (USA), the Japanese Society for Biomaterials, the Australasian Society for Biomaterials, and the Korean Society for Biomaterials.
Articles are welcomed from all scientists. Membership in the Society for Biomaterials is not a prerequisite for submission.