SIBS triblock copolymers in cardiac surgery: in vitro and in vivo studies in comparison with ePTFE

Implantation of polymeric heart valves can solve the problems of existing valve substitutes – mechanical and biological. Objective: to comprehensively assess the hemocompatibility of styrene-isobutylene-styrene (SIBS) triblock copolymer, synthesized by controlled cationic polymerization in comparison with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) used in clinical practice. Materials and methods. SIBS-based films were made by polymer solution casting method; in vitro biocompatibility assessment was performed using cell cultures, determining cell viability, cell adhesion and proliferation; tendency of materials to calcify was determined through in vitro accelerated calcification; in vivo biocompatibility assessment was performed by subcutaneous implantation of rat samples; hemocompatibility was determined ex vivo by assessing the degree of hemolysis, aggregation, and platelet adhesion. Results. The molecular weight of synthesized polymer was 33,000 g/mol with a polydispersity index of 1.3. When studying cell adhesion, no significant differences (p = 0.20) between the properties of the SIBS polymer (588 cells/mm²) and the properties of culture plastics (732 cells/mm²) were discovered. Cell adhesion for the ePTFE material was 212 cells/mm². Percentage of dead cells on SIBS and ePTFE samples was 4.40 and 4.72% (p = 0.93), respectively, for culture plastic – 1.16% (p < 0.05). Cell proliferation on the ePTFE surface (0.10%) was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than for the same parameters for SIBS and culture plastic (62.04 and 44.00%). Implantation results (60 days) showed the formation of fibrous capsules with average thicknesses of 42 μm (ePTFE) and 58 μm (SIBS). Calcium content in the explanted samples was 0.39 mg/g (SIBS), 1.25 mg/g (ePTFE) and 93.79 mg/g (GA-xenopericardium) (p < 0.05). Hemolysis level of red blood cells after contact with SIBS was 0.35%, ePTFE – 0.40%, which is below positive control (p < 0.05). Maximum platelet aggregation of intact platelet-rich blood plasma was 8.60%, in contact with SIBS polymer – 18.11%, with ePTFE – 22.74%. Conclusion. In terms of hemocompatibility properties, the investigated SIBS polymer is not inferior to ePTFE and can be used as a basis for development of polymeric prosthetic heart valves.

1. Manji RA, Ekser B, Menkis AH, Cooper DKC. Bioprosthetic heart valves of the future. Xenotransplantation. 2014; 21 (1): 1–10. doi: 10.1111/xen.12080. PMCID: PMC4890621.

2. Jaffer IH, Whitlock RP. A mechanical heart valve is the best choice. Heart Asia. 2016; 8 (1): 62–64. doi: 10.1136/heartasia-2015-010660. PMCID: PMC4898622.

3. Chambers J. Prosthetic heart valves. Int J Clin Pract. 2014; 68 (10): 1227–1230. doi: 10.1111/ijcp.12309. PMID: 24423099.

4. Smith M, Cantwell WJ, Guan Z, Tsopanos S, Theobald MD, Nurick GN et al. The quasi-static and blast response of steel lattice structures. Journal of Sandwich Structures and Materials. 2011; 13 (4): 479–501. doi: 10.1177/1099636210388983.

5. Hawreliak JA, Lind J, Maddox B, Barham M, Messner M, Barton N et al. Dynamic Behavior of Engineered Lattice Materials. Sci Rep. 2016; 6: 28094. doi: 10.1038/srep28094. PubMed PMID: 27321697. PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4913358.

6. Hasan A, Ragaert K, Swieszkowski W, Selimovic S, Paul A, Camci-Unal G et al. Biomechanical properties of native and tissue engineered heart valve constructs. Journal of Biomechanics. 2014; 47: 1949–1963. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.09.023.

7. Базылев ВВ, Воеводин АБ, Раджабов ДА, Россейкин ЕВ. Первый опыт трансапикальной имплантации протеза аортального клапана «МедИнж». Бюллетень НЦССХ им. А.Н. Бакулева РАМН «Сердечно-сосудистые заболевания». 2016; 17 (6): 141.

8. Bezuidenhout D, Zilla P. Flexible leaflet polymeric heart valves. Cardiovasc Card Ther Devices. 2014; 15: 93–129.

9. Daebritz SH, Fausten B, Hermanns B, Franke A, Schroeder J, Groetzner J et al. New flexible polymeric heart valve prostheses for the mitral and aortic positions. Heart Surg Forum. 2004; 7 (5): 525–532. PMID: 15799940. doi: 10.1532/HSF98.20041083.

10. Chetta GE, Lloyd JR. The design, fabrication and evaluation prosthetic heart valve. J Biomech Eng. 1980; 102: 34–41. PMID: 7382451.

11. Jiang H, Campbell G, Boughner D, Wand WK, Quantz M. Design and manufacture of a polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) cryogel tri-leaflet heart valve prosthesis. Medical Engineering & Physics. 2004; 26: 269–277. PMID: 15121052. doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2003.10.007.

12. Quintessenza JA, Jacobs JP, Chai PJ, Morell VO, Lindberg H. Polytetrafluoroethylene bicuspid pulmonary valve implantation: experience with 126 patients. World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg. 2010; 1 (1): 20–27. PMID: 23804719. doi: 10.1177/2150135110361509.

13. Kidane AG, Burriesci G, Edirisinghe M, Ghanbari H, Bonhoeffer P et al. A novel nanocomposite polymer for development of synthetic heart valve leaflets. Acta Biomaterialia. 2009; 5: 2409–2417. PMID: 19497802. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2009.02.025.

14. Claiborne TE, Sheriff J, Kuetting M, Steinseifer U, Slepian MJ, Bluestein DJ. In vitro evaluation of a novel hemodynamically optimized trileaflet polymeric prosthetic heart valve. Biomech Eng. 2013; 135 (2): 021021. PMID: 23445066. PMCID: PMC5413125. doi: 10.1115/1.4023235.

15. Strickler F, Richard R, McFadden S, Lindquist J, Schwarz MC, Faust R et al. In vivo and in vitro characterization of poly(styrene-b-isobutylene-b-styrene) copolymer stent coatings for biostability, vascular compatibility and mechanical integrity. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2010 Feb; 92 (2): 773–782. doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.32418.

16. Pinchuk L, Wilson GJ, Barry JJ, Schoephoerster RT, Parel JM, Kennedy JP. Medical applications of poly(styreneblock-isobutylene-block-styrene) («SIBS»). Biomaterials. 2008; 29 (4): 448–460. PMID: 17980425. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.09.041.

17. Fray ME, Prowans P, Puskas JE, Altsta V. Biocompatibility and Fatigue Properties of Polystyrene-Polyisobutylene-Polystyrene, an Emerging Thermoplastic Elastomeric Biomaterial. Biomacromolecules. 2006, 7, 844–850.

18. Wang Q, McGoron AJ, Bianco R, Kato Y, Pinchuk L. Schoephoerster RT. In vivo assessment of a novel polymer (SIBS) trileaflet heart valve. J Heart Valve Dis. 2010; 19: 499–505. PMID: 20845899.

19. Duraiswamy N, Choksi TD, Pinchuk L, Schoephoerster RT. A phospholipid-modified polystyrene-polyisobutylene-polystyrene (SIBS) triblock polymer for enhanced hemocompatibility and potential use in artificial heart valves. J Biomater Appl. 2009; 23 (4): 367–379. doi: 10.1177/0885328208093854.

20. Claiborne TE, Slepian MJ, Hossainy S, Bluestein D. Polymeric trileaflet prosthetic heart valves: evolution and path to clinical reality. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2012; 9 (6): 577–594. doi: 10.1586/erd.12.51. PMID: 23249154. PMCID: PMC3570260.

21. Kaszas G, Puskas JE, Kennedy JP, Hager WG, Polym J. Sci. Part A: Polym. Chem. 1991, 29, 427–435. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/pola.1991.080290316.

22. Lu S, Zhang P, Sun X, Gong F, Yang S, Shen L et al. Synthetic ePTFE grafts coated with an anti-CD133 antibody-functionalized heparin/collagen multilayer with rapid in vivo endothelialization properties. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2013 Aug 14; 5 (15): 7360–7369. doi: 10.1021/am401706w.

23. Wiggins MJ, Wilkoff B, Anderson JM, Hiltner A. Biodegradation of polyether polyurethane inner insulation in bipolar pacemaker leads. J Biomed Mater Res. 2001; 58: 302–307.

24. Knoll A, Magerle R, Krausch G. Tapping Mode Atomic Force Microscopy on Polymers: Where Is the True Sample Surface? Macromolecules. 2001, 34, 4159–4165.

25. Bracaglia LG, Yu L, Hibino N, Fisher JP. Reinforced pericardium as a hybrid material for cardiovascular applications. Tissue Eng Part A. 2014 Nov; 20 (21–22): 2807–2816. doi: 10.1089/ten.TEA.2014.0516.

26. Jee KS, Kim YS, Park KD, Kim YH. A novel chemical modification of bioprosthetic tissues using L-arginine. Biomaterials. 2003 Sep; 24 (20): 3409–3416.

27. Hilbert S, Ferrans V, Tomita Y, Eidbo E, Jones M. Evaluation of explanted polyurethane trileaflet cardiac valve prostheses. Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 1987. 94 (3): 419–429.

28. Corvo MF, Dugan SW, Werth MS, Stevenson CM, Summers SA, Pohl DR et al. Cadaret Analytica AutoStart 150 mL Burette. NAMSA. 2008: 8.

29. Kakavand M, Yazdanpanah G, Ahmadiani A, Niknejad H. Blood compatibility of human amniotic membrane compared with heparin-coated ePTFE for vascular tissue engineering. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2017 Jun; 11 (6): 1701–1709. doi: 10.1002/term.2064.

30. Xia Ye, Ze Wang, Xianghua Zhang, Ming Zhou, Lan Cai. Hemocompatibility research on the micro-structure surface of a bionic heart valve. Bio-Medical Materials and Engineering. 2014; 24: 2361–2369.

31. Thevenot P, Hu W, Tang L. Surface chemistry influences implant biocompatibility. Curr Top Med Chem. 2008; 8 (4): 270–280.