Key result
Donkey pericardium reduces calcification by ~50% vs bovine pericardium, with superior tensile strength.
Why the study?
The suitability of glutaraldehyde-treated donkey pericardium as an alternative bioprosthetic heart valve material compared to bovine pericardium was not established.
Glutaraldehyde-tanned donkey pericardium demonstrates reduced calcification and increased tensile strength compared to bovine pericardium, suggesting potential as a bioprosthetic valve substitute.
Donkey pericardium's reduced thickness merits further biomaterial testing; animal data leave open clinical translation.
This study comparatively evaluates the characteristics of glutaraldehyde-treated acellular bovine and donkey pericardium using histological and electronic microscopic observation techniques, shrinkage temperature, and mechanical properties, as well as determining calcium and phosphorus content at 4 and 8 weeks after the subcutaneous implantation of donkey and bovine pericardium in Wistar rats. Donkey pericardium was significantly thinner compared with bovine pericardium (1.622 ± 0.161 mm vs. 4.027 ± 0.401 mm, P < 0.0001) and was associated with significantly greater tensile strength (14.21 ± 3.81 MPa vs. 3.78 ± 1.20 MPa, P = 0.001) and elastic modulus (81.67 ± 20.41 MPa vs. 21.67 ± 11.69 MPa, P < 0.0001) over bovine pericardium. Shrinkage temperature of donkey pericardium was similar to that of bovine pericardium (87.43 ± 0.55°C vs. 87.50 ± 0.36°C, P = 0.810). No differences between groups were observed for maximum load (donkey: 21.64 ± 7.02 KN/m vs. bovine: 15.05 ± 4.50 KN/m, P = 0.082) and tear strength (donkey: 11.54 ± 5.33 MPa vs. bovine: 10.69 ± 3.77 MPa, P = 0.757). Calcium content was significantly lower in donkey pericardium compared with bovine pericardium at 4 weeks (690.15 ± 191.27 µg/g vs. 1381.73 ± 62.52 µg/g, P = 0.001) and 8 weeks (205.24 ± 62.40 µg/g vs. 910.48 ± 398.29 µg/g, P = 0.037). This preliminary study has confirmed that glutaraldehyde-tanned donkey pericardium, demonstrating reduced calcification and increased tensile strength, may provide a suitable bioprosthetic valve substitute.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2012) studied Bioprosthetic heart valve material evaluation. Glutaraldehyde-treated acellular donkey pericardium vs. Glutaraldehyde-treated acellular bovine pericardium was evaluated on Calcium content at 4 weeks (p=0.001). Glutaraldehyde-tanned donkey pericardium demonstrated significantly lower calcium content at 4 weeks (690.15 vs 1381.73 µg/g, P=0.001) and greater tensile strength than bovine pericardium.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: