Advanced

Biocompatibility of nitinol and stainless steel in the bladder: An experimental study

Balakrishnan, N; Uvelius, Bengt LU ; Zaszczurynski, P; Lin, D L I and Damaser, M S (2005) In Journal of Urology 173(2). p.647-650
Abstract
Purpose: We tested the biocompatibility of nitinol, a nickel titanium alloy, and stainless steel (SS) as bladder implant materials. Materials and Methods: Rats received a nitinol implant, an SS implant or were sham controls. Two, 3, 6 and 8 weeks following implantation 24-hour voiding behavior studies were per-formed to investigate bladder irritation. All animals were sacrificed 8 weeks after implantation and a sample of urine was aspirated for culture. The bladders were examined by light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Results: No visible encrustations or infections were noted in urine. Voiding frequency in the light period 6 weeks after implantation was significantly decreased in the 2 implant groups compared with sham... (More)
Purpose: We tested the biocompatibility of nitinol, a nickel titanium alloy, and stainless steel (SS) as bladder implant materials. Materials and Methods: Rats received a nitinol implant, an SS implant or were sham controls. Two, 3, 6 and 8 weeks following implantation 24-hour voiding behavior studies were per-formed to investigate bladder irritation. All animals were sacrificed 8 weeks after implantation and a sample of urine was aspirated for culture. The bladders were examined by light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Results: No visible encrustations or infections were noted in urine. Voiding frequency in the light period 6 weeks after implantation was significantly decreased in the 2 implant groups compared with sham controls. There were no other significant differences in frequency or mean volume per void in the light or dark periods at any time point. Light microscopy demonstrated similar implant tissue effects in all groups with little or no inflammation or fibrosis. Under SEM all implants showed a brittle, amorphous coating devoid of cells. The transition between the urothelium, mucosa and the rod was smoother for SS than for nitinol, suggesting an affinity of SS for mucosa. In all nitinol rods discontinuity was present between the mucosa and rod. Conclusions: Nitinol and SS do not cause more irritation than the effects of surgery alone and the 2 materials seem to be biocompatible in the bladder. Nitinol may be more inert than SS based on SEM results. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
nitinol, prostheses and implants, bladder, rats, Sprague-Dawley, stainless steel
in
Journal of Urology
volume
173
issue
2
pages
647 - 650
publisher
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
external identifiers
  • pmid:15643281
  • wos:000226450800070
  • scopus:12544254586
ISSN
1527-3792
DOI
10.1097/01.ju.0000143197.93944.14
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
124f7edd-e18c-4ed7-9b5d-0eef9a772014 (old id 255187)
date added to LUP
2007-08-06 13:50:13
date last changed
2017-02-22 11:44:22
@article{124f7edd-e18c-4ed7-9b5d-0eef9a772014,
  abstract     = {Purpose: We tested the biocompatibility of nitinol, a nickel titanium alloy, and stainless steel (SS) as bladder implant materials. Materials and Methods: Rats received a nitinol implant, an SS implant or were sham controls. Two, 3, 6 and 8 weeks following implantation 24-hour voiding behavior studies were per-formed to investigate bladder irritation. All animals were sacrificed 8 weeks after implantation and a sample of urine was aspirated for culture. The bladders were examined by light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Results: No visible encrustations or infections were noted in urine. Voiding frequency in the light period 6 weeks after implantation was significantly decreased in the 2 implant groups compared with sham controls. There were no other significant differences in frequency or mean volume per void in the light or dark periods at any time point. Light microscopy demonstrated similar implant tissue effects in all groups with little or no inflammation or fibrosis. Under SEM all implants showed a brittle, amorphous coating devoid of cells. The transition between the urothelium, mucosa and the rod was smoother for SS than for nitinol, suggesting an affinity of SS for mucosa. In all nitinol rods discontinuity was present between the mucosa and rod. Conclusions: Nitinol and SS do not cause more irritation than the effects of surgery alone and the 2 materials seem to be biocompatible in the bladder. Nitinol may be more inert than SS based on SEM results.},
  author       = {Balakrishnan, N and Uvelius, Bengt and Zaszczurynski, P and Lin, D L I and Damaser, M S},
  issn         = {1527-3792},
  keyword      = {nitinol,prostheses and implants,bladder,rats,Sprague-Dawley,stainless steel},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {2},
  pages        = {647--650},
  publisher    = {Lippincott Williams & Wilkins},
  series       = {Journal of Urology},
  title        = {Biocompatibility of nitinol and stainless steel in the bladder: An experimental study},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000143197.93944.14},
  volume       = {173},
  year         = {2005},
}