Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Matrix metalloproteinase-1 and -8 are active during the wound healing and remodelling processes, degrading native extracellular matrix and implantable devices. However, traditional in vitro assays utilize primarily matrix metalloproteinase-1 to mimic the in vivo degradation microenvironment. Herein, we assessed the influence of various concentrations of matrix metalloproteinase- 1 and 8 (50, 100, and 200 U/mL) as a function of pH (5.5 and 7.4) and time (3, 6, 9, 12, and 24 h) on the degradation profile of three tissue grafts (chemically cross-linked Permacol, nonchemically cross-linked Permacol and nonchemically cross-linked Strattice) and a collagen biomaterial (nonchemically cross-linked collagen sponge). Chemically cross-linked and nonchemically cross-linked Permacol samples exhibited the highest resistance to enzymatic degradation, while nonchemically cross-linked collagen sponges exhibited the least resistance to enzymatic degradation. Qualitative and quantitative degradation analysis of all samples revealed a similar degradation profile over time, independently of the matrix metalloproteinase used and its respective concentration and pH. These data indicate that matrix metalloproteinase-1 and matrix metalloproteinase-8 exhibit similar degradation profile in vitro, suggesting that matrix metalloproteinase-8 should be used for collagenase assay.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Helling et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: