Search

Despite the increasing interest in cellulose-derived materials in biomedical research, there remains a significant gap in comprehensive in vivo analyses of cellulosic materials obtained from various sources and processing methods. To explore durable alternatives to synthetic medical meshes, we evaluated the in vivo biocompatibility of bacterial nanocellulose, regenerated cellulose, and cellulose nanofibrils in a subcutaneous transplantation model, alongside incumbent polypropylene and polydioxanone. Notably, this study demonstrates the in vivo biocompatibility of regenerated cellulose obtained through alkali dissolution and subsequent regeneration. All cellulose-derived implants triggered the expected foreign body response in the host tissue, characterized predominantly by macrophages and foreign body giant cells. Porous materials promoted cell ingrowth and biointegration. Our results highlight the potential of bacterial nanocellulose and regenerated cellulose as safe alternatives to commercial polypropylene meshes. However, the in vivo fragmentation observed for cellulose nanofibril meshes suggests the need for measures to optimize their processing and preparation.

Direct ink writing via single or multihead extrusion is used to synthesize layer-by-layer (LbL) meshes comprising renewable polysaccharides. The best mechanical performance (683 ± 63 MPa modulus and 2.5 ± 0.4 MPa tensile strength) is observed for 3D printed structures with full infill density, given the role of electrostatic complexation between the oppositely charged components (chitosan and cellulose nanofibrils). The LbL structures develop an unexpectedly high wet stability that undergoes gradual weight loss at neutral and slightly acidic pH. The excellent biocompatibility and noncytotoxicity toward human monocyte/macrophages and controllable shrinkage upon solvent exchange make the cellular meshes appropriate for use as biomedical implants., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing financial interest., (© 2021 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society.)

Background and Methods: Treatment practices of pregnancies and deliveries and newborn health have differed from each other between Finland and Estonia. We examined changes in the differences from 1997 to 2011 from national birth registers and official statistics., Results: Deliveries, abortions and overall fertility remained similar in Finland. In Estonia, the number of deliveries increased and abortions decreased. Problems in the perinatal period continued to be more common in Estonia., Conclusions: Estonian reproductive health and treatment practices of deliveries have approached the situation in Finland.