A Review of the Biocompatibility of Implantable Devices: Current Challenges to Overcome Foreign Body Response

Concentric bioprinting of alginate-based tubular constructs using multi-nozzle extrusion-based technique

“…Although these methods have proven to be effective in creating tubular structures, these synthetic polymeric materials lack adhesion factors such as arginine-glycine-aspartic acid (RGD) which are important for cell adhesion, proliferation and matrix production [16,17] . Moreover, these materials usually degrade-although only after long periods of time-and would induce foreign body response by the host [18] which could be T lethal to the patient in the long run [19] . Furthermore, the degradation residues of these materials could potentially cause substantial damage to the tissue around it [20] .…”

Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring with a Long-Term Subconjunctival Glucose Sensor

“…Several attempts to overcome FBR are discussed in the literature, e.g., specially designed surface architectures and biocompatible or drug-eluting surface coatings. [28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] This article provides in vivo data from a clinical trial of the EyeSense subconjunctival glucose monitoring system (SGMS) with a biocompatible surface coating, designed to minimize protein-surface interaction, to prolong the duration of action of the system.…”

Opening windows on new biology and disease mechanisms: development of real-time in vivo sensors

“…A particular concern is biocompatibility: any sensor must not only be biologically inert, but also not perturb the normal biology the sensor is interrogating. A variety of techniques have been adopted to address this problem, from incorporating polyethylene glycol linkers to embedding the device in a hydrogel [8]. The optimum solution for biocompatibility depends on the demands of the system and its composition.…”