EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION OF THE DEVELOPING A MATRIX BASED ON DECELLULARIZED VASCULAR WALL FOR SUBSEQUENT SUBSTITUTION URETHROPLASTY


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Urethral strictures are urgent urological problem. Anastomotic and substitution urethroplasty are the most effective treatments. For substitution urethroplasty, buccal mucosa is most often used. There are the following difficulties associated with the substitution urethroplasty: complications in the donor area, the lack of tissue for substitution, an additional incision, and increased timing of surgery due to the need to obtain a flap or graft. Tissue engineering can be useful in solving the above problems. Tissue engineering involves the use a matrix without cells and matrix with one or more types of cells (tissue-engineering designs). In our study we have evaluated the ability to create a matrix for the substitution urethroplasty in animal experiments. The decellularized cadaveric arterial wall was used as a matrix. Decellularization was performed using enzymatic method. At the first stage, we transplanted matrix fragments in interscapular region in rats. An extremely weak bioactivity dof decellularized matrix of cadaveric arterial wall (DMCAW) due to the low immunogenicity of the material was revealed. Thus resorption of DMCAW was quite slow (60-90 days). At the second stage, in an experiment on rabbits, substitution urethroplasty using tubular DMCAW was successfully performed. Intraoperative urethral defect up to 1.8 cm was created, which was replaced by a tubular DMCAW. The use of this type of matrix has showed good structural and functional results: urethral strictures did not arise, the rejection of the matrix was not observed. A slow degradation of the matrix and progressive epithelialization of connective tissue capsule were revealed. Decellularized matrix based on cadaveric arterial wall can be considered as a material for substitution urethroplasty.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

P. V Glybochko

SBEI HPE First MSMU n.a. I.M. Sechenov

Yu. G Alyaev

SRI of Uronephrology and Human Reproductive Health

V. N Nikolenko

Institute of Molecular Medicine

A. B Shekhter

Institute of Molecular Medicine

A. Z Vinarov

SRI of Uronephrology and Human Reproductive Health

L. P Istranov

Institute of Molecular Medicine

E. V Istranova

Institute of Molecular Medicine

R. K Aboyants

Institute of Molecular Medicine

A. B. Lyundup

Institute of Molecular Medicine

M. I Danilevsky

SRI of Uronephrology and Human Reproductive Health

A. E Guller

Institute of Molecular Medicine

P. A Elistratov

Institute of Molecular Medicine

D. V Butnaru

SRI of Uronephrology and Human Reproductive Health

D. F Kantimerov

SRI of Uronephrology and Human Reproductive Health

Email: kantimeroff@gmail.com

G. A Mashin

SBEI HPE First MSMU n.a. I.M. Sechenov

A. S Titov

SBEI HPE First MSMU n.a. I.M. Sechenov

A. V Proskura

SBEI HPE First MSMU n.a. I.M. Sechenov

K. V Kudrichevskaya

SBEI HPE First MSMU n.a. I.M. Sechenov

References

  1. I. Santucci R.A., G.F. Joyce, and M. Wise, Male urethral stricture disease. J Urol. 2007; 177(5):1667-1674.
  2. Pansadoro V., Emiliozzi P. Iatrogenic prostatic urethral strictures: classification and endoscopic treatment. Urology. 1999;53(4):784-789.
  3. Brandes S.B. Urethral Reconstructive Surgery. Current Clinical Urology, ed. E.A. Klein. 2008: Humana Press. 379.
  4. Stormont T.J., Suman V.J., Oesterling J.E. Newly diagnosed bulbar urethral strictures: etiology and outcome of various treatments. J Urol. 1993; 150(5 Pt 2):1725-1758.
  5. Gurdal M. et al. Contact neodymium: YAG laser ablation of recurrent urethral strictures using a side-firing fiber. J Endourol. 2003; 17(9):791-794.
  6. Andrich D.E., Mundy A.R. Substitution urethroplasty with buccal mucosal-free grafts. J Urol. 2001; 165(4):1131-1133.
  7. Bhargava S., Chapple C.R. Buccal mucosal urethroplasty: is it the new gold standard? BJU Int, 2004;93(9):1191-1193.
  8. Kane C.J. et al. Multi-institutional experience with buccal mucosa onlay urethroplasty for bulbar urethral reconstruction. J Urol. 2002; 167(3):1314-1317.
  9. Tolstunov L., Pogrel M.A., McAninch J. W. Intraoral morbidity following free buccal mucosal graft harvesting for urethroplasty. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1997;84(5): 480-482.
  10. Eppley B.L., Keating M., Rink R. A buccal mucosal harvesting technique for urethral reconstruction. J Urol. 1997;157(4):1268-1270.
  11. Zimmerman W.B., Santucci R.A. Buccal mucosa urethroplasty for adult urethral strictures. Indian J Urol. 2011;27(3): 364-370.
  12. Mangera A., Patterson J.M., Chapple C.R. A systematic review of graft augmentation urethroplasty techniques for the treatment of anterior urethral strictures. Eur Urol. 2011;59(5):797-814.
  13. Barbagli G. et al. Morbidity of oral mucosa graft harvesting from a single cheek. Eur. Urol. 2010;58(1):33-41.
  14. el-Kassaby A., AbouShwareb T., Atala A. Randomized comparative study between buccal mucosal and acellular bladder matrix grafts in complex anterior urethral strictures. J Urol. 2008 ; 179(4) : 1432-1436.
  15. Fiala R., et al. Porcine small intestinal submucosa graft for repair of anterior urethral strictures. Eur Urol. 2007;51(6):1702-1708.
  16. Palminteri E. et al. Long-term results of small intestinal submucosa graft in bulbar urethral reconstruction. Urology. 2012;79(3): 695-701.
  17. Atala A., Guzman L., Retik A.B. A novel inert collagen matrix for hypospadias repair. J Urol. 1999;162(3 Pt 2):1148-1151.
  18. Mantovani F., et al. Reconstructive urethroplasty using porcine acellular matrix. Eur Urol. 2003;44(5): 600-602.
  19. El-Kassaby A.W. et al. Urethral stricture repair with an off-the-shelf collagen matrix. J Urol. 2003;169(1):170-173.
  20. le Roux P.J. Endoscopic urethroplasty with unseeded small intestinal submucosa collagen matrix grafts: a pilot study. J Urol. 2005; 173(1):140-143.
  21. Palminteri E. et al. Small intestinal submucosa (SIS) graft urethroplasty: short-term results. Eur Urol. 2007;51(6):1695-701.
  22. Farahat Y.A., et al. Endoscopic urethroplasty using small intestinal submucosal patch in cases of recurrent urethral stricture: a preliminary study. J Endourol. 2009 ;23(12) :2001-2005.
  23. Mantovani F. et al. Reconstructive urethroplasty using porcine acellular matrix (SIS): evolution of the grafting technique and results of 10-year experience. Urologia. 2011 ;78(2):92-97.
  24. Fossum M. et al. Prepubertal follow-up after hypospadias repair with autologous in vitro cultured urothelial cells. Acta Paediatr. 2012;101(7):755-760.
  25. Engel O. et al. 15 tissue-engineered buccal mucosa urethroplasty. Outcome of our first 10 patients. J Urology. 2012;187(4): e6.
  26. Bhargava S. et al. Tissue-engineered buccal mucosa urethroplasty-clinical outcomes. Eur Urol. 2008;53(6): 1263-1269.
  27. Роговая О.С., Файзулин А.К., Демин Н.В. Применение клеточных технологий для реконструкции уретры в детской урологии. Андрология и генитальная хирургия. 2009;4:36-39.
  28. Raya-Rivera A. et al. Tissue-engineered autologous urethras for patients who need reconstruction: an observational study. Lancet. 2011;377(9772):1175-1182.
  29. Леменев В.Л., Алябьев В.С. Опыт клинического применения биопротеза кровеносного сосуда «Гомографт». Клинический опыт и проблемы коллагенопластики. Материалы научно-практической конференции ММА им. И.М. Сеченова, 1999, 143.
  30. Авторское свидетельство № 1543599 от 15.10.198.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies