中国组织工程研究

中国组织工程研究 ›› 2016, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (12): 1753-1756.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2016.12.012

• 细胞外基质材料 extracellular matrix materials • 上一篇    下一篇

复合补片和生物补片修复犬腹壁缺损的对比

段友良1，林 奥2   

  1. 1山东省交通医院，山东省济南市 250031；2山东大学医学院人体解剖学基础实验室，山东省济南市 250012
  • 收稿日期:2016-02-02 出版日期:2016-03-18 发布日期:2016-03-18
  • 通讯作者: 林奥，副教授，硕士，山东大学医学院人体解剖学基础实验室，山东省济南市 250012
  • 作者简介:段友良，男，1980年生，山东省日照市人，汉族，主治医师，主要从事血管外科、介入放射研究。
  • 基金资助:
    山东卫生科技发展项目(2012AA1202001)

Composite patch versus biological patch in the repair of canine abdominal wall defects

Duan You-liang1, Lin Ao2   

  1. 1Shandong Jiaotong Hospital, Jinan 250031, Shandong Province, China; 2Laboratory of Human Anatomy, Shandong University Medical School, Jinan 250012, Shandong Province, China
  • Received:2016-02-02 Online:2016-03-18 Published:2016-03-18
  • Contact: Lin Ao, Master, Associate professor, Laboratory of Human Anatomy, Shandong University Medical School, Jinan 250012, Shandong Province, China
  • About author:Duan You-liang, Attending physician, Shandong Jiaotong Hospital, Jinan 250031, Shandong Province, China
  • Supported by:

    the Health Science and Technology Development Program of Shandong Province, No. 2012AA1202001

PDF

665

被引次数

1

摘要：

文章快速阅读：

文题释义：

临床上使用的补片主要分为3大类：即不可吸收合成补片、生物补片及可吸收合成补片。不可吸收合成补片：主要指聚酯、PP等，这一类型的补片置入人体后，能够为缺损部位提供足够的张力，但由于机体内补片的长期存在，容易造成机体术后发生感染、肠粘连等并发症，尤其是对于缺损面积较大者，该类补片并不适用。
生物补片：也是临床上缺损中修复较多的补片，它是人尸源性或动物的组织经脱细胞、消毒杀菌等形成的，该类补片具有一定的结构性和功能性蛋白，当置入人体后，能够作为支架诱导缺损部位的细胞和组织，且随着时间的推移，补片能够完全被吸收，最终分解为人体所需要的物质。

高分子材料补片：运用过程中也存在许多不足，该类补片价格相对昂贵，并且使用前均需要进行浸泡，补片尺寸也比较小，并发症发生率较高，导致临床使用受到一定限制。

 

背景：目前对于复合补片修复腹壁缺损的效果存在很大争议。
目的：对比复合补片和生物补片修复犬腹壁缺损的效果。
方法：取10只犬，制作腹壁缺损模型后随机分组，实验组采用复合补片进行修复，对照组采用生物补片进行修复。修复后30，60，90 d，评估切口粘连情况；修复后14 d，取补片及腹壁缺损组织进行组织学检测。
结果与结论：实验组不同时间点的切口粘连轻于对照组(P < 0.05)。修复后14 d，实验组材料结构清晰，无吸收征象，材料周围存在大量炎性细胞浸润，如中性粒细胞、淋巴细胞等，无细胞吞噬补片；对照组材料结构模糊，存在炎性细胞浸润，出现轻微吸收征象，且炎性反应、纤维增生情况重于实验组。结果表明，与生物补片相比，复合补片修复腹壁缺损可有效减轻炎性反应。 
 
ORCID: 0000-0002-2484-4051(林奥)

关键词: 生物材料, 材料相容性, 复合补片, 生物补片材料, 雄性普通犬, 修复效果, 实验性, 腹部缺损模型, 吸收征象, 应用价值

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Currently a big controversy erupts in the repair of abdominal wall defects with composite patch.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the composite patch and biological patch in the repair of abdominal wall defects in dogs.
METHODS: Ten dogs were selected to prepare abdominal wall defect models, and then randomized into experimental group subjected to composite patch repair and control group subjected to biological patch repair. Incision adhesion was assessed at postoperative 30, 60, 90 days; patches and defect tissues were taken and detected histologically at postoperative 14 days.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The incision adhesion in the experimental group was milder than that in the control group at different time post operation (P < 0.05). At 14 days post operation, the material structure was clear with no signs of absorption in the experimental group, and there were a large amount of infiltrated inflammatory cells around the patch material, such as neutrophils and lymphocytes, and non-phagocytic patch was found; in the control group, the material structure was fuzzy with the presence of inflammatory cell infiltration and slight signs of absorption. Moreover, inflammation and fibrosis were severer in the control group than the experimental group. These findings indicate that compared with the biological patch, the composite patch is better to effectively reduce inflammatory reactions.