Autologous pericardium versus a xenograft substitute in myocardial wound healing

Abstract

This study compared repair of myocardial wounds covered with autologous pericardium to healing of wounds covered with gluteraldehyde-preserved bovine pericardium in an experimental canine model. Right (RV) and left (LV) full thickness ventriculotomies were made and closed. In the control group (n = 12), the pericardium was closed over the wound; in the experimental group (n = 12), wounds were covered with bovine pericardium. Animals were sacrificed at 14, 21, 28, and 42 days. After excising the pericardium, 6 mm punch biopies of normal RV, RV wound, normal LV, and LV wound were assayed for hydroxyproline (HPro). Both autologous and bovine pericardium became densely adherent to the wounds. Bovine pericardium was mildly adherent over unwounded areas, while autologous pericardium was usually free. Normal RV contained more than twice as much HPro as normal LV (5.4 ± 0.57 μg/mg vs 1.7 ± 0.35 μg/mg, P < 0.0002). A gradual rise in HPro over time was seen in both groups, but this increase was statistically significant only at 42 days (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in HPro between wounds covered with autologous pericardium and those covered with bovine grafts (P = 0.13) at any of the sample times in this study. In this experimental canine model, the pericardium does not appear to play a prominent role in myocardial wound healing by contributing collagen-producing fibroblasts. Furthermore, the bovine pericardial xenograft becomes densely adherent to LV and RV incisions. In the clinical setting, such may make reoperation more hazardous when the heart has been previously incised or coronary bypass grafts have been constructed. © 1986.

Publication Title

Journal of Surgical Research

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS