Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesAnimal StudyPubMed

Colorectal tissue engineering: A comparative study between porcine small intestinal submucosa (SIS) and chitosan hydrogel patches.

Denost Q., Adam JP., Pontallier A., Montembault A., Bareille R., Siadous R.

Animal Study on Chronic Wound, published in Surgery (2015) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Animal Study
Journal
Surgery (2015)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
26275832
DOI
10.1016/j.surg.2015.06.040
Citations
13

Abstract (original English)

Objective Tissue engineering may provide new operative tools for colorectal surgery in elective indications. The aim of this study was to define a suitable bioscaffold for colorectal tissue engineering. Methods We compared 2 bioscaffolds with in vitro and in vivo experiments: porcine small intestinal submucosa (SIS) versus chitosan hydrogel matrix. We assessed nontoxicity of the scaffold in vitro by using human adipose-derived stem cells (hADSC). In vivo, a 1 × 2-cm colonic wall defect was created in 16 rabbits. Animals were divided randomly into 2 groups according to the graft used, SIS or chitosan hydrogel. Graft area was explanted at 4 and 8 weeks. The end points of in vivo experiments were technical feasibility, behavior of the scaffold, in situ putative inflammatory effect, and the quality of tissue regeneration, in particular smooth muscle layer regeneration. Results In vitro, hADSC attachment and proliferation occurred on both scaffolds without a substantial difference. After proliferation, hADSCs kept their mesenchymal stem cell characteristics. In vivo, one animal died in each group. Eight weeks after implantation, the chitosan scaffold allowed better wound healing compared with the SIS scaffold, with more effective control of inflammatory activity and an integral regeneration of the colonic wall including the smooth muscle cell layer. Conclusion The outcomes of in vit

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
Adipose TissueAnimalsCell ProliferationCells, CulturedChitosanColonColorectal SurgeryGuided Tissue RegenerationHumansHydrogels

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research