[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 174.129.114.211. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
June 1979

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

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).

Arch Surg. 1979;114(6):698-702. doi:10.1001/archsurg.1979.01370300052007
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)

×