Search

Biomaterials and their applications are perhaps among the most dynamic areas of research within the field of biomedicine. Any advance in this topic translates to an improved quality of life for recipient patients. One application of a biomaterial is the repair of an abdominal wall defect whether congenital or acquired. In the great majority of cases requiring surgery, the defect takes the form of a hernia. Over the past few years, biomaterials designed with this purpose in mind have been gradually evolving in parallel with new developments in the different surgical techniques. In consequence, the classic polymer prosthetic materials have been the starting point for structural modifications or new prototypes that have always strived to accommodate patients' needs. This evolving process has pursued both improvements in the wound repair process depending on the implant interface in the host and in the material's mechanical properties at the repair site. This last factor is important considering that this site—the abdominal wall—is a dynamic structure subjected to considerable mechanical demands. This review aims to provide a narrative overview of the different biomaterials that have been gradually introduced over the years, along with their modifications as new surgical techniques have unfolded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Biological approaches to intervertebral disc (IVD) restoration and/or regeneration have become of increasing interest. However, the IVD comprises a viscoelastic system whose biological replacement remains challenging. The present study sought to design load-sharing two-component model systems of circular, nested, concentric elements reflecting the nucleus pulposus and annulus fibrosus. Specifically, we wanted to investigate the effect of architectural design variations on (1) model system failure loads when testing the individual materials either separately or homogeneously mixed, and (2) also evaluate the potential of modulating other mechanical properties of the model systems. Methods: Two sets of softer and harder biomaterials, 0.5% and 5% agarose vs. 0.5% agarose and gelatin, were used for fabrication. Architectural design variations were realized by varying ring geometries and amounts while keeping the material composition across designs comparable. Results: Variations in the architectural design, such as lamellar width, number, and order, combined with choosing specific biomaterial properties, strongly influenced the biomechanical performance of IVD constructs. Biomechanical characterization revealed that the single most important parameter, in which the model systems vastly exceeded those of the individual materials, was failure load. The model system failure loads were 32.21- and 84.11-fold higher than those of the agarose materials and 55.03- and 2.14-fold higher than those of the agarose and gelatin materials used for system fabrication. The compressive strength, dynamic stiffness, and viscoelasticity of the model systems were always in the range of the individual materials. Conclusions: Relevant architecture-promoted biomechanical performance-tuning of tissue-engineered constructs for biological IVD replacement can be realized by slight modifications in the design of constructs while preserving the materials' compositions. Minimal variations in the architectural design can be used to precisely control structure–function relations for IVD constructs rather than choosing different materials. These fundamental findings have important implications for efficient tissue-engineering of IVDs and other load-bearing tissues, as potential implants need to withstand high in situ loads. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]