You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 114 No. 6, June 1979 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  EDITORIAL
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (8)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

In Vivo Comparison of Replamineform, Silastic, and Bioelectric Polyurethane Arterial Grafts

Loren F. Hiratzka, MD; James A. Goeken, MD; Rodney A. White, MD; Creighton B. Wright, MD

Arch Surg. 1979;114(6):698-702.


Abstract

• The replamineform process allows fabrication of microporous prostheses with control of both pore diameter and structural geometry by means of a variety of biomaterials. Tubular prostheses 3 cm long, 6 mm inside diameter, and 1 mm wall thickness were made of Silastic or Bioelectric Polyurethane (BEP) with use of a template of the echinoderm Heterocentrotus mammillatus. Pore diameter of the prosthesis wall was 18 to 25 µ. Light and scanning-electron microscopy of grafts removed between 1 and 32 weeks demonstrated that organization and endothelialization of neointima were similar for both polymers, being complete by 4 to 8 weeks. However, the character of prosthesis wall ingrowth was strikingly different: the microporous lattice of BEP was completely ingrown early, but was apparently fragmented by continued granulomatous inflammation by 32 weeks, while Silastic generated minimal inflammatory response and slower fibrous tissue and capillary ingrowth. Thus, with Silastic and BEP, similarities in neointima organization appeared independent of distinct differences in wall ingrowth. The replamineform process is a unique means of studying surface healing and wall ingrowth of different biomaterials as microporous vascular prostheses in a controlled fashion.

(Arch Surg 114:698-702, 1979)



Author Affiliations

From the Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics and the Veterans Administration Hospital (Drs Hiratzka and Wright) and the Department of Pathology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics (Dr Goeken), Iowa City, and the Department of Surgery, Harbor General Hospital and the University of California at Los Angeles School of Medicine, Torrance, Calif (Dr White).


Footnotes

Accepted for publication Nov 20, 1978.

Read before the 32nd annual meeting of the Society for Vascular Surgery, Los Angeles, June 23, 1978.

Reprint requests to Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA 52242 (Dr Hiratzka).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1979 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.