Premium
Biocompatibility of subsieve‐size capsules versus conventional‐size microcapsules
Author(s) -
Sakai Shinji,
Mu Changjun,
Kawabata Kenji,
Hashimoto Ichiro,
Kawakami Koei
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
journal of biomedical materials research part a
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.849
H-Index - 150
eISSN - 1552-4965
pISSN - 1549-3296
DOI - 10.1002/jbm.a.30676
Subject(s) - biocompatibility , materials science , capsule , biomedical engineering , peritoneal cavity , cell size , particle size , biocompatible material , agarose , in vivo , transplantation , surgery , chemical engineering , chromatography , medicine , chemistry , biology , metallurgy , botany , microbiology and biotechnology , engineering
Biocompatibility of cell‐enclosing capsules, defined as suppression of pericapsular cellular reactions, is one of the factors governing the success of enclosed cell transplantation in in vivo cell therapy. Agarose capsules of subsieve size, less than 100 μm in diameter, and conventional size, ∼300–1000 μm in diameter, were implanted into the peritoneal cavity and epididymal fat pads of mice and rats, respectively, to determine the effect of a reduction in diameter to subsieve size. The degree of cellular reaction to the subsieve‐size capsules was much lower than that of the conventional‐size microcapsules, independent of implantation site. The frequency of overgrown subsieve‐size capsules retrieved from the peritoneal cavities was less than 5% in contrast to ∼20% for capsules 387 μm in diameter. In addition, no increase in floating cells, which are generated through capsule stimulation, was observed in the peritoneal cavity only with subsieve‐size capsules. From these results, we concluded that subsieve‐size capsules are more biocompatible than microcapsules of conventional size. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res, 2006