Ureter Regeneration–The Proper Scaffold Has to Be Defined

The aim of this study was to compare two different acellular scaffolds: natural and synthetic, for urinary conduit construction and ureter segment reconstruction. Acellular aortic arch (AAM) and poly(L-lactide-co-caprolactone) (PLCL) were used in 24 rats for ureter reconstruction in both tested grou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kloskowski, Tomasz, Jundziłł, Arkadiusz, Kowalczyk, Tomasz, Nowacki, Maciej, Bodnar, Magdalena, Marszałek, Andrzej, Pokrywczyńska, Marta, Frontczak-Baniewicz, Małgorzata, Kowalewski, Tomasz A., Chłosta, Piotr, Drewa, Tomasz
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2014
Materias:
Research Article
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4146565/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25162415
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106023
Descripción
Sumario:The aim of this study was to compare two different acellular scaffolds: natural and synthetic, for urinary conduit construction and ureter segment reconstruction. Acellular aortic arch (AAM) and poly(L-lactide-co-caprolactone) (PLCL) were used in 24 rats for ureter reconstruction in both tested groups. Follow-up period was 4 weeks. Intravenous pyelography, histological and immunohistochemical analysis were performed. All animals survived surgical procedures. Patent uretero-conduit junction was observed only in one case using PLCL. In case of ureter segment reconstruction ureters were patent in one case using AAM and in four cases using PLCL scaffolds. Regeneration of urothelium layer and focal regeneration of smooth muscle layer was observed on both tested scaffolds. Obtained results indicates that synthetic acellular PLCL scaffolds showed better properties for ureter reconstruction than naturally derived acellular aortic arch.

Ejemplares similares