2020
DOI: 10.1002/adfm.202007226
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dealing with the Foreign‐Body Response to Implanted Biomaterials: Strategies and Applications of New Materials

Abstract: Foreign‐body response caused by implanted biomaterials seriously impedes the function of implants and is a major obstacle to the development of implantable biomaterials and medical devices. Recent advances in implantable biomaterials and medical devices have provided strategies to resist the foreign‐body response. In this review, the mechanism of the foreign‐body response and conventional strategies to mitigate foreign‐body response is briefly introduced. Then, three types of promising foreign‐body response re… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
139
0
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 164 publications
(159 citation statements)
references
References 338 publications
(311 reference statements)
0
139
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…We introduced porosity in the bioelectronic patch using a laser engraver technology since porosity is a well-established design parameter for implantable devices shown to reduce the inflammatory response. 40 As shown in Figures 1D and 1E, the laser engraver successfully created regular and circular pores in the patch, achieved by melting the chitosan polymer. The pore shape was maintained following the polymerization of aniline on the surface of the chitosan substrate.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…We introduced porosity in the bioelectronic patch using a laser engraver technology since porosity is a well-established design parameter for implantable devices shown to reduce the inflammatory response. 40 As shown in Figures 1D and 1E, the laser engraver successfully created regular and circular pores in the patch, achieved by melting the chitosan polymer. The pore shape was maintained following the polymerization of aniline on the surface of the chitosan substrate.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…These shortcomings of PEG have limited its long-term in vivo application for biomaterials and biomedical devices. It is imperative to develop anti-FBR materials because materials have been the bottleneck that greatly impedes the advance in this field and the development of implantable biomaterials and medical devices 11 , 13 . Inspired by the low immunogenic silk sericin, we speculated that poly-L-serine (P-L-Ser) materials may resist the FBR.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…I mplantable biomaterials and devices will be recognized by the host immune system as foreign objects to initiate a series of interactions at the implant-host interface, which leads to the foreign-body response (FBR) including strong inflammatory responses, foreign-body giant cell formation, fibrosis, and eventually collagen encapsulation around the implants and isolation of implants from the host tissue [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] . The FBR of implants will lead to cutting off of nutrient transportation, painful tissue deformation, and even implant failure.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the last decades, the rise in life expectancy, traumas, tumors, and other bone diseases increased the number of orthopedic surgeries, which demand implants with good biocompatibility, mechanical and surface properties [ 1 ]. Therefore, development of new materials and techniques is necessary to obtain more durable implants with lower rejection rates [ 2 , 3 ]. Thus, regenerative medicine continues to search for new scaffolds [ 4 , 5 ], artificial organs [ 6 ], biomaterials [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 ] and complementary therapies [ 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ] in order to optimize tissue regeneration [ 18 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%