Lamination for subdermal implant fixation

Enhanced In Vivo Vascularization of 3D-Printed Cell Encapsulation Device Using Platelet-Rich Plasma and Mesenchymal Stem Cells

The current standard for cell encapsulation platforms is enveloping cells in semipermeable membranes that physically isolate transplanted cells from the host while allowing for oxygen and nutrient diffusion. However, long-term viability and function of encapsulated cells are compromised by insufficient oxygen and nutrient supply to the graft. To address this need, a strategy to achieve enhanced vascularization of a 3D-printed, polymeric cell encapsulation platform using platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) is investigated. The study is conducted in rats and, for clinical translation relevance, in nonhuman primates (NHP). Devices filled with PRP, MSCs, or vehicle hydrogel are subcutaneously implanted in rats and NHP and the amount and maturity of penetrating blood vessels assessed via histopathological analysis. In rats, MSCs drive the strongest angiogenic response at early time points, with the highest vessel density and endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) expression. In NHP, PRP and MSCs result in similar vessel densities but incorporation of PRP ensues higher levels of eNOS expression. Overall, enrichment with PRP and MSCs yields extensive, mature vascularization of subcutaneous cell encapsulation devices. It is postulated that the individual properties of PRP and MSCs can be leveraged in a synergistic approach for maximal vascularization of cell encapsulation platforms.

A review of the effects of different marking and tagging techniques on marine mammals

Wildlife research often requires marking and tagging animals to collect data on survival, reproduction, movement, behaviour and physiology. Identification of individual marine mammals can be carried out using tags, brands, paint, dye, photogrammetry, telemetry and other techniques. An analysis of peer-reviewed articles published from January 1980 to April 2011 addressing the effects of marking revealed a preponderance of studies focussed on short-term effects such as injuries and behavioural changes. Some marking techniques were reported to cause pain and to change swimming and haul-out behaviour, maternal attendance, and duration of foraging trips. However, marking has typically not been found to affect survival. No published research has addressed other possible long-term effects of marking related to injuries or pain responses. Studies of the more immediate effects of marking (mostly related to externally attached devices such as radio-transmitters) have shown a variety of different types and magnitudes of responses. It is important to note that studies failing to find treament differences are less likely to be published, meaning that the present and any other reviews based on published literature may be a biased sample of all research conducted on the topic. Publishing results that found no or low impacts (i.e. best practices) as well as those that found significant impacts on animals should both be encouraged. Future research under more controlled conditions is required to document acute effects of marking, including injury and pain, and to better understand longer-term effects on health, reproduction and survival. We recommend that studies using marked animals standardise their reports, with added detail on methodology, monitoring and sampling design, and address practices used to minimise the impact of marking on marine mammals.

Biomechanics of the sensor-tissue interface-effects of motion, pressure, and design on sensor performance and the foreign body response-part I: theoretical framework

The importance of biomechanics in glucose sensor function has been largely overlooked. This article is the first part of a two-part review in which we look beyond commonly recognized chemical biocompatibility to explore the biomechanics of the sensor-tissue interface as an important aspect of continuous glucose sensor biocompatibility. Part I provides a theoretical framework to describe how biomechanical factors such as motion and pressure (typically micromotion and micropressure) give rise to interfacial stresses, which affect tissue physiology around a sensor and, in turn, impact sensor performance. Three main contributors to sensor motion and pressure are explored: applied forces, sensor design, and subject/patient considerations. We describe how acute forces can temporarily impact sensor signal and how chronic forces can alter the foreign body response and inflammation around an implanted sensor, and thus impact sensor performance. The importance of sensor design (e.g., size, shape, modulus, texture) and specific implant location on the tissue response are also explored. In Part II: Examples and Application (a sister publication), examples from the literature are reviewed, and the application of biomechanical concepts to sensor design are described. We believe that adding biomechanical strategies to the arsenal of material compositions, surface modifications, drug elution, and other chemical strategies will lead to improvements in sensor biocompatibility and performance.