The next 5 years in cardiac pacemakers: a preview

Systematic Investigation of Polyurethane Biomaterial Surface Roughness on Human Immune Responses in vitro

It has been widely shown that biomaterial surface topography can modulate host immune response, but a fundamental understanding of how different topographies contribute to pro-inflammatory or anti-inflammatory responses is still lacking. To investigate the impact of surface topography on immune response, we undertook a systematic approach by analyzing immune response to eight grades of medical grade polyurethane of increasing surface roughness in three in vitro models of the human immune system. Polyurethane specimens were produced with defined roughness values by injection molding according to the VDI 3400 industrial standard. Specimens ranged from 0.1 μm to 18 μm in average roughness (Ra), which was confirmed by confocal scanning microscopy. Immunological responses were assessed with THP-1-derived macrophages, human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs), and whole blood following culture on polyurethane specimens. As shown by the release of pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines in all three models, a mild immune response to polyurethane was observed, however, this was not associated with the degree of surface roughness. Likewise, the cell morphology (cell spreading, circularity, and elongation) in THP-1-derived macrophages and the expression of CD molecules in the PBMC model on T cells (HLA-DR and CD16), NK cells (HLA-DR), and monocytes (HLA-DR, CD16, CD86, and CD163) showed no influence of surface roughness. In summary, this study shows that modifying surface roughness in the micrometer range on polyurethane has no impact on the pro-inflammatory immune response. Therefore, we propose that such modifications do not affect the immunocompatibility of polyurethane, thereby supporting the notion of polyurethane as a biocompatible material.

How smart should pacemakers Be?

The concept of the "smart" pacemaker has been continuously changing during 40 years of progress in technology. When we talk today about smart pacemakers, it means optimal treatment, diagnosis, and follow-up for patients fitting the current indications for pacemakers. So what is smart today becomes accepted as "state of the art" tomorrow. Originally, implantable pacemakers were developed to save lives from prolonged episodes of bradycardia and/or complete heart block. Now, in addition, they improve quality of life via numerous different functions acting under specific conditions, thanks to the introduction of microprocessors. The devices have become smaller, with the miniaturization of the electrical components, without compromising longevity. Nevertheless, there are still some unmatched objectives for these devices, for example, the optimization of cardiac output and the management of atrial arrhythmias in dual-chamber devices. Furthermore, indications continue to evolve, which in turn require new, additional functions. These functions are often very complex, necessitating computerized programming to simplify application. In addition, the follow-up of these devices is time-consuming, as appropriate system performance has to be regularly monitored. A great many of these functions could be automatically performed and documented, thus enabling physicians and paramedical staff to avoid losing time with routine control procedures. In addition, modern pacemakers offer extensive diagnostic functions to help diagnose patient symptoms and pacemaker system problems. Different types of data are available, and their presentation differs from one company to the other. This huge amount of data can only be managed with automatic diagnostic functions. Thus, the smart pacemaker of the near future should offer high flexibility to permit easy programming of available therapies and follow-up, and extensive, easily comprehensible diagnostic functions.

The future of arrhythmia surgery

The future of arrhythmia surgery is discussed in light of the 25 years of historical developments that have led to the present explosion in antiarrhythmic therapies and technologies. The role of the arrhythmia surgeon in these developments is outlined, along with a number of exciting near-term and far-term developments that will continue to revolutionize therapeutic interventions for arrhythmia problems.