1. Read: Scuderi et al. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 116:1130-1136, 2005 and answer the following questions.

a. What were the materials used in the implant? What were the advantages of the materials used?

b. What was the surface texture of these implants? How did this contribute to the biocompatibility of the implant?

c. What conclusions were drawn from the animal study? Were the length and the choice of animal model appropriate?

d. For the clinical cases, what measures of biocompatibility were presented? What do these measures suggest in terms of the biocompatibility?

e. What was the most probable mechanism of failure?

f. Why might there be oxidation products of the filler material present in and around the implant?

2. Hemocompatibility of a material surface is critical for the success of a material being considered for cardiovascular device applications.

What are the ways to create a hemocompatible surface?

The following papers detailed three different approaches which may be used to promote hemocompatibility of biomaterial surfaces.

a. Outline the experimental approaches used

b. Explain the rationale of each approach

c. Compare and contrast their potential for hemocompatibility with justifications

References

CR Nuttelman, DJ Mortisen, SM Henry, KS Anseth. ‘Attachment of fibronectin to poly(vinyl alcohol) hydrogels promotes NIH3T3 cell adhesion, proliferation, and migration'. J Biomed Mater Res (2001) 57:217-223.