Volume 106, Issue 2 pp. 716-725
Original Research Report

In vivo response to decellularized mesothelium scaffolds

Michael J. Cronce

Michael J. Cronce

Center for Regenerative Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114

Both contributed equally as joint first authors.

Search for more papers by this author
Renea A. Faulknor

Renea A. Faulknor

Center for Regenerative Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114

Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, 02115

Both contributed equally as joint first authors.

Search for more papers by this author
Irina Pomerantseva

Irina Pomerantseva

Center for Regenerative Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114

Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114

Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, 02115

Search for more papers by this author
Xiang-Hong Liu

Xiang-Hong Liu

DSM Biomedical, Exton, Pennsylvania, 19341

Search for more papers by this author
Scott M. Goldman

Scott M. Goldman

DSM Biomedical, Exton, Pennsylvania, 19341

Search for more papers by this author
Emmanuel C. Ekwueme

Emmanuel C. Ekwueme

Center for Regenerative Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114

Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, 02115

Search for more papers by this author
Olive Mwizerwa

Olive Mwizerwa

Center for Regenerative Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114

Search for more papers by this author
Craig M. Neville

Craig M. Neville

Center for Regenerative Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114

Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114

Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, 02115

Search for more papers by this author
Cathryn A. Sundback

Corresponding Author

Cathryn A. Sundback

Center for Regenerative Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114

Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114

Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, 02115

Correspondence to: C. Sundback; e-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author
First published: 21 March 2017
Citations: 15

Abstract

Biological surgical scaffolds are used in plastic and reconstructive surgery to support structural reinforcement and regeneration of soft tissue defects. Macrophage and fibroblast cell populations heavily regulate scaffold integration into host tissue following implantation. In the present study, the biological host response to a commercially available surgical scaffold (Meso BioMatrix Surgical Mesh (MBM)) was investigated for up to 9 weeks after subcutaneous implantation; this scaffold promoted superior cell migration and infiltration previously in in vitro studies relative to other commercially available scaffolds. Infiltrating macrophages and fibroblasts phenotypes were assessed for evidence of inflammation and remodeling. At week 1, macrophages were the dominant cell population, but fibroblasts were most abundant at subsequent time points. At week 4, the scaffold supported inflammation modulation as indicated by M1 to M2 macrophage polarization; the foreign body giant cell response resolved by week 9. Unexpectedly, a fibroblast subpopulation expressed macrophage phenotypic markers, following a similar trend in transitioning from a proinflammatory to anti-inflammatory phenotype. Also, α-smooth muscle actin-expressing myofibroblasts were abundant at weeks 4 and 9, mirroring collagen expression and remodeling activity. MBM supported physiologic responses observed during normal wound healing, including cellular infiltration, host tissue ingrowth, remodeling of matrix proteins, and immune modulation. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 106B: 716–725, 2018.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

SMG is a current employee and XHL is a former employee of DSM Biomedical. Both played substantial roles providing information regarding clinical use and properties of dECM materials as well as potential issues with manufacturing methods. DSM partially funded this study but had no role in the study design; data collection, analysis, or interpretation; or manuscript preparation.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.