Evaluasi In Vivo Biokompatibilitas Implan Hidrogel Hidrokoloid Alami Untuk Aplikasi Biomedis
Statistik artikel
Data OJS dan sumber sitasiTayangan dan unduhan adalah aktivitas yang tercatat di OJS; pemrosesan statistik dapat tertunda. Tanda — berarti angka dari sumber tersebut belum tersedia. Cari di Google Scholar
Bilah Samping Artikel
Sitiya Humayra, Anisa Sabira, Gina Sonia, Salman, Rahma Yulia (2025). Evaluasi In Vivo Biokompatibilitas Implan Hidrogel Hidrokoloid Alami Untuk Aplikasi Biomedis. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Sciences, JPS Volume 8 Nomor 2 (2025). https://doi.org/10.36490/journal-jps.com.v8i2.848
Isi Artikel Utama
Abstrak
Hidrogel merupakan material biomaterial yang menjanjikan untuk aplikasi biomedis karena sifat biokompatibilitasnya yang tinggi, struktur tiga dimensi yang menyerupai jaringan biologis, dan kemampuannya untuk terdegradasi secara bertahap dalam tubuh. Terutama, hidrogel hidrokoloid berbasis polimer alami, seperti glukomanan porang-sagu, menunjukkan potensi besar untuk aplikasi seperti sistem penghantaran obat dan rekayasa jaringan. Biokompatibilitas material ini sangat penting untuk memastikan bahwa ia dapat diterima dengan baik oleh jaringan tubuh tanpa menimbulkan reaksi merugikan. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi biokompatibilitas in vivo implan hidrogel hidrokoloid yang terbuat dari glukomanan porang-sagu yang dimodifikasi silang menggunakan asam sitrat, dengan fokus pada aplikasi biomedis. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini melibatkan implantasi implan hidrogel pada mencit jantan dengan berat sekitar 25 gram, yang dibagi menjadi empat kelompok: tiga kelompok dengan variasi formula implan hidrogel dan satu kelompok kontrol tanpa implan. Setelah 10-20 hari setelah implantasi, jaringan di sekitar implan dievaluasi melalui analisis histopatologi menggunakan pewarnaan Hematoksilin-Eosin (H&E). Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa implan hidrogel memiliki biokompatibilitas yang baik, dengan respons inflamasi ringan yang didominasi oleh makrofag dan pembentukan kapsul fibrotik yang moderat. Tidak ditemukan tanda-tanda patologis seperti nekrosis atau granuloma pada jaringan sekitar implan. Formula F1 dan F5 menunjukkan biokompatibilitas yang lebih baik daripada F3, dengan respons inflamasi yang lebih rendah. Kesimpulannya, implan hidrogel hidrokoloid berbasis glukomanan porang-sagu menunjukkan potensi biokompatibilitas yang baik untuk aplikasi subkutan dan otot skelet. Namun, perlu dilakukan optimasi lebih lanjut untuk meningkatkan integrasi jaringan dan mengurangi celah antara implan dan jaringan sekitarnya. Penelitian ini memberikan dasar untuk pengembangan lebih lanjut material hidrogel hidrokoloid sebagai biomaterial untuk aplikasi biomedis, seperti sistem penghantaran obat dan rekayasa jaringan.
Rincian Artikel
Terbitan
Bagian
Artikel ini berlisensiCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Cara Mengutip
Referensi
Buwalda SJ, Vermonden T, Hennink WE. Hydrogels for therapeutic delivery: current developments and future directions. Biomacromolecules 2017;18:316–30.
Chai Q, Jiao Y, Yu X. Hydrogels for biomedical applications: their characteristics and the mechanisms behind them. Gels 2017;3:6.
Ho T-C, Chang C-C, Chan H-P, Chung T-W, Shu C-W, Chuang K-P, et al. Hydrogels: properties and applications in biomedicine. Molecules 2022;27:2902.
Kim D, Park K. Swelling and mechanical properties of superporous hydrogels of poly (acrylamide-co-acrylic acid)/polyethylenimine interpenetrating polymer networks. Polymer (Guildf) 2004;45:189–96.
Hoare TR, Kohane DS. Hydrogels in drug delivery: Progress and challenges. Polymer (Guildf) 2008;49:1993–2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2008.01.027.
Sulastri E, Lesmana R, Zubair MS, Elamin KM, Wathoni N. A comprehensive review on ulvan based hydrogel and its biomedical applications. Chem Pharm Bull 2021;69:432–43.
Li Z, He C, Yuan B, Dong X, Chen X. Injectable Polysaccharide Hydrogels as Biocompatible Platforms for Localized and Sustained Delivery of Antibiotics for Preventing Local Infections. Macromol Biosci 2016;17. https://doi.org/10.1002/mabi.201600347.
Salman, Wahyuni FS, Suardi M, Djamaan A. Synthesis and physicochemical characterization of sago starch-porang glucomannan hydrogels crosslinked fumaric acid as a new material for drug delivery system. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 2024;1356:12078. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1356/1/012078.
Constant C, Moriarty TF, Arens D, Pugliese B, Zeiter S. Peri‐anesthetic Hypothermia in Rodents: A Factor to Consider for Accurate and Reproducible Outcomes in Orthopedic Device‐related Infection Studies. J Orthop Res 2022;41:619–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.25397.
Brás LE de C, Proffitt J, Bloor S, Sibbons P. Effect of Crosslinking on the Performance of a Collagen‐derived Biomaterial as an Implant for Soft Tissue Repair: A Rodent Model. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater 2010;95B:239–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.31704.
Fereidouni F, Todd A, Li Y, Chang C-W, Luong K, Rosenberg AZ, et al. Dual-Mode Emission and Transmission Microscopy for Virtual Histochemistry Using Hematoxylin- And Eosin-Stained Tissue Sections. Biomed Opt Express 2019;10:6516. https://doi.org/10.1364/boe.10.006516.
Pham TTA, Kim H, Lee Y, Kang HW, Park S. Deep Learning for Analysis of Collagen Fiber Organization in Scar Tissue. Ieee Access 2021;9:101755–64. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2021.3097370.
Laurino A, Franceschini A, Pesce L, Cinci L, Montalbano A, Mazzamuto G, et al. A Guide to Perform 3D Histology of Biological Tissues With Fluorescence Microscopy. Int J Mol Sci 2023;24:6747. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24076747.
Cohen‐Rosenblum A, Volaric AK, Browne JA. Retrieval Analysis of a Failed Synthetic Mesh Extensor Mechanism Reconstruction After Total Knee Arthroplasty. Arthroplast Today 2018;4:447–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2018.07.009.
L. SM, L. SG, C. OCL, Flores-Lopes F. Evaluation of the Environmental Monitoring of the Cachoeira River Through Histopathological Alterations of Astyanax Fasciatus. Int J Zool Investig 2019;06:174–86. https://doi.org/10.33745/ijzi.2020.v06i01.014.
Correa‐Aravena J, Vásquez B, Otzen T, Manterola C, Ottone NE. Histological Techniques for the Study of the Dentogingival Junction: A Scoping Review Using the Anatomical Quality Assurance Checklist (AQUA). Int J Morphol 2023;41:926–36. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0717-95022023000300926.
Naahidi S, Jafari M, Logan M, Wang Y, Yuan Y, Bae H, et al. Biocompatibility of hydrogel-based scaffolds for tissue engineering applications. Biotechnol Adv 2017;35:530–44.
Ikada Y. Biocompatibility of hydrogels. Gels Handb., Elsevier; 2001, p. 388–407.
Anderson JM, Rodriguez A, Chang DT. Foreign body reaction to biomaterials. Semin. Immunol., vol. 20, Elsevier; 2008, p. 86–100.
Sheikh Z, Brooks PJ, Barzilay O, Fine N, Glogauer M. Macrophages, Foreign Body Giant Cells and Their Response to Implantable Biomaterials. Materials (Basel) 2015;8:5671–701. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma8095269.
Flores F, Anita R. Synthesis of biocompatible hydrogel of alginate-chitosan enriched with iron sulfide nanocrystals. SLAS Technology, 100158 2024.
Wang Y-K, Ma L, Wang Z-Q, Wang Y, Li P, Jiang B, et al. Clinicopathological features and differential diagnosis of gastric pleomorphic giant cell carcinoma. Open Life Sci 2023;18:20220683.
Williams DF. On the mechanisms of biocompatibility. Biomaterials 2008;29:2941–53.
Flores AVE, Anita REN, Arrocena MCA, Duran FP, Rico FC, Santos-Cruz J, et al. Synthesis of biocompatible hydrogel of alginate-chitosan enriched with iron sulfide nanocrystals. SLAS Technol 2024:100158.
Listyarifah D. Kompatibilitas bahan implan tulang hidroksiapatit dan karbonat hidroksiapatit di jaringan lunak. (Clinical Dent Journal) UGM 2023.
Masir O, Manjas M, Eka Putra A, Agus S. Pengaruh Cairan Cultur Filtrate Fibroblast (CFF) Terhadap Penyembuhan Luka; Penelitian eksperimental pada Rattus Norvegicus Galur Wistar. J Kesehat Andalas 2012;1:112–7. https://doi.org/10.25077/jka.v1i3.78.
Kwee BJ, Mooney DJ. Biomaterials for skeletal muscle tissue engineering. Curr Opin Biotechnol 2017;47:16–22.
Qazi TH, Mooney DJ, Pumberger M, Geissler S, Duda GN. Biomaterials based strategies for skeletal muscle tissue engineering: existing technologies and future trends. Biomaterials 2015;53:502–21.
Cezar CA, Mooney DJ. Biomaterial-based delivery for skeletal muscle repair. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2015;84:188–97.
Kim JH, Seol Y-J, Ko IK, Kang H-W, Lee YK, Yoo JJ, et al. 3D Bioprinted Human Skeletal Muscle Constructs for Muscle Function Restoration. Sci Rep 2018;8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-29968-5.
Iliescu AA, Petcu C, Petcu IC, Gheorghiu I-M, Stan MG, Zurac S. Tissue Reaction to Subcutaneous Implantation of SuperEBA (Reinforced Zinc Oxide Cement) Used as Root-End Filling Material: A Histological Study in Rats. Key Eng Mater 2016;695:247–51. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/kem.695.247.
Pucinelli CM, Silva RAB da, Borges LL, Borges AT do N, Nelson‐Filho P, Consolaro A, et al. Tissue Response After Subcutaneous Implantation of Different Glass Ionomer-Based Cements. Braz Dent J 2019;30:599–606. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201902619.
Modulevsky DJ, Cuerrier CM, Pelling AE. Biocompatibility of Subcutaneously Implanted Plant-Derived Cellulose Biomaterials. PLoS One 2016;11:e0157894. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0157894.
Sydlik SA, Jhunjhunwala S, Webber MJ, Anderson DG, Langer R. In Vivo Compatibility of Graphene Oxide With Differing Oxidation States. ACS Nano 2015;9:3866–74. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.5b01290.
Braile-Sternieri MCVB, Góissis G, Giglioti A de F, Ramirez VDA, Pereira NP, Vasconcellos A de, et al. In Vivo Evaluation of Vivere Bovine Pericardium Valvular Bioprosthesis With a New Anti‐calcifying Treatment. Artif Organs 2020;44. https://doi.org/10.1111/aor.13718.
Hinata G, Yoshiba K, Han L, Edanami N, Yoshiba N, Okiji T. Bioactivity and Biomineralization Ability of Calcium Silicate‐based Pulp‐capping Materials After Subcutaneous Implantation. Int Endod J 2017;50. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12802.
Andrade AS, Silva GF, Camilleri J, Cerri ES, Guerreiro‐Tanomaru JM, Cerri PS, et al. Tissue Response and Immunoexpression of Interleukin 6 Promoted by Tricalcium Silicate–based Repair Materials After Subcutaneous Implantation in Rats. J Endod 2018;44:458–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2017.12.006.
Bilge K, Ataş O, Yıldız Ş, Çalık İ, Dündar S, ATAŞ AG. Histological Evaluation of Tissue Reaction and New Bone Formation of Different Calcium Silicate‐based Cements in Rats. Aust Dent J 2023;69:18–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12980.
Porzionato A, Sfriso MM, Pontini A, Macchi V, Petrelli L, Pavan PG, et al. Decellularized Human Skeletal Muscle as Biologic Scaffold for Reconstructive Surgery. Int J Mol Sci 2015;16:14808–31. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms160714808.
Rollim VM, Reginato GM, Fernandes LM, Arantes J de A, Rigo EC da S, Vercik LCO, et al. Behaviour of Diferent Types of Chitosan Membranes Implanted in Horses. Pesqui Veterinária Bras 2019;39:837–42. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-6160-pvb-6314.
Czajka C, Calder BW, Yost MJ, Drake CJ. Implanted Scaffold-Free Prevascularized Constructs Promote Tissue Repair. Ann Plast Surg 2015;74:371–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/sap.0000000000000439.
Haase T, Krost A, Sauter T, Kratz K, Peter J, Kamann S, et al. In Vivo biocompatibility Assessment of Poly (Ether Imide) Electrospun Scaffolds. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 2015;11:1034–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/term.2002.
Ma W, Lyu H, Pandya M, Gopinathan G, Luan X, Diekwisch TGH. Successful Application of a Galanin-Coated Scaffold for Periodontal Regeneration. J Dent Res 2021;100:1144–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345211028852.