Biochemistry, Immunology, and Tissue Response to Prosthetic Material

  • Susanne K. Woloson
  • Howard P. Greisler


The implantation of relatively biocompatible prosthetic materials has gained wide acceptance in the past few decades. Additionally, there has been an increasing number of indications for using prosthetic material in the practice of surgery. The differential healing response of the surrounding tissue adjacent to the prostheses has been recognized but incompletely understood. Typically, there are three stereotypical responses to foreign material, characterized as (1) destruction or lysis; (2) incorporation and tolerance; and (3) rejection or extrusion.1 A truly biocompatible prosthetic material, unlike all known implants to date, would not elicit a foreign body reaction.


Wound Healing Hernia Repair Vascular Graft Healing Response Prosthetic Material 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ponka JL. Prosthetics in hernia repair. In Hernias of the abdominal wall. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 1980:534–572.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Voorhees AB, Jaretzki A, Blakemore AH. The uses of tubes constructed from Vinyon I cloth in bridging arterial defects. Ann Surg. 1952;35: 332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clowes AW, Kirkman TR, Reidy MA. Mechanisms of arterial grafting. Am J Pathol 1986;123:220–230.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vroman L, Adams AL. Identification of rapid changes at plasma-solid interfaces. J Biomed Mater Res. 1969;3:43–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Williams SK, Berman SS, Kleinert LB. Differential healing and neovascularization of ePTFE implants in subcutaneous versus adipose tissue. J Biomed Mater Res. 1997;35:473–481.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hunt TK, Goodson WH III. In Current surgical diagnosis and treatment, 9th ed. LW Way (Ed.). Norwalk: Appleton and Lange, 1991:95–108.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Andrade JD, Hlady V. Plasma protein adsorption: the big twelve. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1987;516:158–172.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vroman L. Methods of investigating protein interaction on artificial and natural surfaces. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1987;516:300–305.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Roohk HV, Pick J, Hill R, et al. Kinetics of fibrinogen and platelet adherence to biomaterials. ASIAO Trans. 1976;22:1–7.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eberhart RC, Munro MS, Frautschi JR, et al. Influence of endogenous albumin binding on blood-material interactions. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1987;516:78–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ito RK, Rosenblatt MS, Contreras MA, et al. Monitoring platelet interactions with prosthetic graft implants in a canine model. ASAIO Trans. 1990;36:M175–M178.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lackie JM, DeBono D. Interactions of neutrophil granulocytes and endothelium in vitro. Microvasc Res. 1977;13:107–112.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Greisler HP, Dennis JW, Endean ED, et al. Macrophage/biomaterial interaction: the stimulation of endothelialization. J Vasc Surg. 1989;9: 588–593.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    DiCorleto PE, De La Motte CA. Characterization of the adhesion of the human monocyte cell line U-937 to cultured endothelial cells. J Clin Invest. 1985;75:1153–1161.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bennett NT, Schultz GS. Growth factors and wound healing: biochemical properties of growth factors and their receptors. Am J Surg. 1993;165:728–737.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heldin C-H, Ronnstrand L. Characterization for the receptor for platelet-derived growth factor on human fibroblasts: demonstration of an intimate relationship with a 185,000-dalton substrate for the platelet-derived growth factor-stimulated kinase. J Biol Chem. 1983; 258:10054–10061.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Baird A, Mormede P, Bohlen P. Immunoreactive fibroblast growth factor on cells of peritoneal exudate suggests its identity with macrophage-derived growth factor. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1985;126:358–364.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Greisler HP, Ellinger J, Henderson HC. The effects of an atherogenic diet on macrophage/biomaterial interaction. J Vasc Surg. 1991;14:10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Assoian RK, Fleurdelys BE, Stevenson HC, et al. Expression and secretion of type  transforming growth factor by activated human macrophages. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1987;84:6020–6024.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Petsikas D, Cziperle DL, Lam TM, et al. Dacron-induced TGF-β release from macrophages: effects on graft healing. Surg Forum. 1991;42: 326–328.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grant M, Jerden J, Mérimée TJ. Insulin-like growth factor-I modulates endothelial cell Chemotaxis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1987;65:370–371.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pesonen K, Viinikka L, Myllyla G, et al. Characterization of material with epidermal growth factor immunoreactivity in human serum and platelets. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1989;68:486–491.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brown GL, Curtinger L III, Brightwell JR. Enhancement of epidermal regeneration by biosynthetic epidermal growth factor. J Exp Med. 1986;163:1319–1324.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wingren U, Franzen L, Larson GM, et al. Epidermal growth factor accelerates connective tissue wound healing in the perforated rat mesentery. J Surg Res. 1992;53:48–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 24a.
    Elek SD, Cohen PE. The virulence of staphylococcus pyogenes for man: a study of the problems of wound infection. Br J Exp Path. 1957;38:573–586.Google Scholar
  26. 25.
    Murch AR, Grounds AD, Marshall CA, Papadimitriou JM. Direct evidence that inflammatory multinucleate giant cells form by fusion. J Pathol. 1982;137:177–180.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 26.
    Adler RH. An evaluation of surgical mesh in the repair of hernias and tissue defects. Arch Surg. 1962;85:156–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 27.
    Calne RY. Repair of bilateral hernia with Mersilene® mesh behind rectus abdominis. Arch Surg. 1974;109:532–536.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 28.
    Collier HS, Griswald RA. Repair of direct inguinal hernia without tension. Am Surg. 1967;33:715–716.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 29.
    Elliott MP, Juler GL. Comparison of Marlex® and microporous Teflon® sheets when used for hernia repair in the experimental animal. Am J Surg. 1979;137:342–344.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 30.
    Brown GL, Richardson JD, Malangoni MA, Tobin GR, Ackerman D, Polk HC Jr. Comparison of prosthetic materials for abdominal wall re-construction in the presence of contamination and infection. Ann Surg. 1985;201:705–711.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 31.
    Law NW, Ellis H. Adhesion formation and peritoneal healing on prosthetic materials. Clin Mater. 1988;3:95–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 32.
    Walker PM, Langer B. Marlex for repair of abdominal wall defects. Can J Surg. 1976;19:211–213.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 33.
    Hamer-Hodges DW, Scott NB. Replacement of an abdominal wall defect using expanded ePTFE sheet (Gore-Tex®). J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1985;30:65–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 34.
    Bujan J, Contreras LA, Carrera-San Martin A, et al. The behavior of different types of polytetrafluoroethylene prostheses in the reparative scarring process of abdominal wall defects. Histol Histopathol. 1997; 12:683–690.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 35.
    Cerise EJ, Busuttil RW, Craighead CC, et al. The use of Mersilene® mesh in repair of abdominal wall hernias. Ann Surg. 1975;181:728–734.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 36.
    Greisler HP, Cabusao EB, Lam TM, et al. Kinetics of collagen deposition within bioresorbable and nonresorbable vascular prostheses. ASAIO Trans. 1991;37:M472–M475.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 37.
    Cooper ML, Hansbrough JF, Spielvogel RL, et al. In vivo optimization of a living dermal substitute employing cultured human fibroblasts on a biodegradable polyglycolic acid or polyglactin mesh. Biomaterial. 1991;12:243–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 38.
    Greisler HP. Arterial regeneration over absorbable prostheses. Arch Surg. 1982;117:1425–1431.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 39.
    Tyrell J, Silberman H, Chandrasoma P, et al. Absorbable versus permanent mesh in abdominal operations. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1989; 168:227–232.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 40.
    Lilly GE, Cutcher JL, Jones JC, et al. Reaction of oral tissues to suture material—IV. Oral Surg. 1972;33:152–161.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 41.
    Edlich RF, Panek PH, Rodeheaver GT, et al. Physical and chemical configuration of sutures in the development of surgical infection. Ann Surg. 1973;177:679–688.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 42.
    Dayton MT, Buchele VA, Sirazi SS, et al. Use of an absorbable mesh to repair contaminated abdominal wall defects. Arch Surg. 1986;121: 954–960.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 43.
    Brismar B, Pattersson N. Polyglycolic acid (Dexon®) mesh graft for abdominal wound support in healing-compromised patients. Acta Chir Scand. 1988;154:509–510.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 44.
    Greisler HP, Tattersall CW, Klosak JJ, et al. Partially bioresorbable vascular grafts in dogs. Surgery. 1991;110:645–655.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 45.
    Greisler HP, Henderson SC, Lam TM. Basic fibroblast growth factor production in vitro by macrophages exposed to Dacron® and polyglactin 910. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed. 1993;4:415–430.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 46.
    Greisler HP. Bioresorbable materials and macrophage interaction. J Vasc Surg. 1991;13:748–750.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susanne K. Woloson
    • 1
  • Howard P. Greisler
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryLoyola University Medical CenterMaywoodUSA
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryLoyola University Medical CenterMaywoodUSA

Personalised recommendations