Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Blood Rev. 2017 Jan;31(1):11-21. doi: 10.1016/j.blre.2016.07.003. Epub 2016 Jul 25.

Stirred, shaken, or stagnant: What goes on at the blood-biomaterial interface.

Author information

1
Institute of Functional Interfaces (IFG), Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Hermann von Helmholtz Platz 1, 76344 Eggenstein-Leopoldshafen, Germany; Department of Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98105, USA. Electronic address: Ilya.Reviakine@kit.edu.
2
Institute of Biomaterial Science and Berlin-Brandenburg Centre for Regenerative Therapies (BCRT), Helmholtz Zentrum Geesthacht, Kantstrasse 55, 14513 Teltow, Germany.
3
Department of Chemical Engineering, School of Biomedical Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada.
4
Rhodes Engineering Research Center, Department of Bioengineering, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA.
5
Department of Systems Design Engineering, Biomedical Engineering, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 3G1, Canada.
6
HaemoScan, Stavangerweg 23-23, 9723JC Groningen, The Netherlands.

Abstract

There is a widely recognized need to improve the performance of vascular implants and external medical devices that come into contact with blood by reducing adverse reactions they cause, such as thrombosis and inflammation. These reactions lead to major adverse cardiovascular events such as heart attacks and strokes. Currently, they are managed therapeutically. This need remains unmet by the biomaterials research community. Recognized stagnation of the blood-biomaterial interface research translates into waning interest from clinicians, funding agencies, and practitioners of adjacent fields. The purpose of this contribution is to stir things up. It follows the 2014 BloodSurf meeting (74th International IUVSTA Workshop on Blood-Biomaterial Interactions), offers reflections on the situation in the field, and a three-pronged strategy integrating different perspectives on the biological mechanisms underlying blood-biomaterial interactions. The success of this strategy depends on reengaging clinicians and on the renewed cooperation of the funding agencies to support long-term efforts.

KEYWORDS:

Antiplatelet therapy; Biomaterials; Cardiovascular implants; Coagulation; Hemocompatibility; Platelets

PMID:
27478147
DOI:
10.1016/j.blre.2016.07.003
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center