Experimental Investigations of Bladder Regeneration Using Teflon-Felt as a Bladder Wall Substitute

Bladder reconstruction: The past, present and future

“…The most commonly used materials in experimental studies and clinical trials are Teflon, silicon and collagen matrices (61). However, cell and tissue incompatibilities appear to be the major restrictions of these materials, leading to the development of other synthetic polymers, such as PLGA (62)(63)(64)(65). These materials were designed specifically to possess adequate structural and biological properties, which can be manipulated for optimal cell proliferation and differentiation (66).…”

The Artificial Bladder

“…This lipid membrane prevents adherence of other agents including bacteria and crystals. Alloplasts like the ones mentioned above can now be surface coated with PC [30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44]. Studies of fibrinogen and platelet binding have shown significant reductions in adsorption on the PC-coated alloplasts [30]as compared with non-PC-coated controls.…”

“…Porous alloplasts carry a high risk of urinary encrustation [35], and their use as intraurinary device should be avoided. However, silicone or polyurethane may be coated on their external surface with porous alloplasts that watertightly bind the device to autologous tissues and eliminate the ‘fibrous encapsulation’ that occurs with native polymers.…”

“…Collective experimental data suggest than any contact of the porous material with bacteria will lead to colonization of the alloplast and erosion and loss of fibroblastic tissue ingrowth. Experimental experience dictates that porous alloplasts be used only ‘external’ to the urinary tract [35, 36, 37, 38, 39]. Anecdotal data suggest that movement of a porous alloplast within tissue retards or inhibits effective tissue bonding.…”

“…A porous-biomaterial reservoir would avoid this complication. Unfortunately, such porous biomaterials carry a high risk of urinary encrustation [35]. …”