METHODS: The decellularization was achieved using a developed closed sonication treatment system for 10 hrs, and continued with a washing process for 5 days. For the control, a simple immersion treatment was set as a benchmark to compare the decellularization efficiency. Histological and biochemical assays were conducted to investigate the cell removal and retention of the vital extracellular matrix. Surface ultrastructure of the prepared scaffolds was evaluated using scanning electron microscope at 5,000× magnification viewed from cross and longitudinal sections. In addition, the biomechanical properties were investigated through ball indentation testing to study the stiffness, residual forces and compression characteristics. Statistical significance between the samples was determined with p-value =0.05.
RESULTS: Histological and biochemical assays confirmed the elimination of antigenic cellular components with the retention of the vital extracellular matrix within the sonicated scaffolds. However, there was a significant removal of sulfated glycosaminoglycans. The surface histoarchitecture portrayed the preserved collagen fibril orientation and arrangement. However, there were minor disruptions on the structure, with few empty micropores formed which represented cell lacunae. The biomechanical properties of bioscaffolds showed the retention of viscoelastic behavior of the scaffolds which mimic native tissues. After immersion treatment, those scaffolds had poor results compared to the sonicated scaffolds due to the inefficiency of the treatment.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this study reported that the closed sonication treatment system had high capabilities to prepare ideal bioscaffolds with excellent removal of cellular components, and retained extracellular matrix and biomechanical properties.
METHODS: A total of 110 putatively healthy and non-obese subjects were divided into three groups according to their level of VF and BP. Common carotid artery BFV was measured using a developed portable Doppler ultrasound measurement system.
RESULTS: The most pronounced peak systolic velocity (S1) was lower (p < 0.05) in the hypertensive group and the peak diastolic velocity (D) was significantly lower in the pre-hypertensive group than in the normotensive group. There were differences in velocity reflection and resistive indices between the hypertensive and other two BP groups. The higher VF group had significantly lower S1 and D velocities and resistive and vascular elasticity indices. By contrast, the velocity reflection index was larger in the higher VF group.
CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed that there were significant differences in the BFV among non-obese subjects who differed in level of VF and BP. This study confirms that a putatively increasing VF and BP level is associated with the development of hypertension.