Ureteral stents have been widely used as biomedical devices to treat some urological diseases for several decades. However, the encrustation complications hamper the long-time clinical use of the ureteral stents. In this work, a new type of biodegradable material for the ureteral stents, methoxypoly(ethylene glycol)-block-poly(L-lactide-ran-Ɛ-caprolactone) (mPEG-PLACL), is evaluated to overcome this problem. The results show that the hydrophilicity and degradation rate in artificial urine of mPEG-PLACL are both significantly increased. It is worth noting that the mPEG-PLACL shows a lower amount of encrustation after immersing the stents in the dynamic urinary extracorporeal circulation (DUEC) model for 7 days. In addition, 71% Ca and 92% Mg are inhibited in vivo by quantitative analysis. Pathological analysis exhibit that the mPEG-PLACL cause less diffuse mucosal hyperplasia after 7 weeks of implantation. All the results indicate that this new type of biodegradable material had an excellent potential for the ureteral stents in the future.
GultekinogluMKurumBKarahanS, et al.
Polyethyleneimine brushes effectively inhibit encrustation on polyurethane ureteral stents both in dynamic bioreactor and in vivo.Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl2017;
71: 1166–1174.
2.
TunneyMKeanePJonesD, et al.
Comparative assessment of ureteral stent biomaterial encrustation.Biomaterials1996;
17: 1541–1546.
3.
KnollTSchubertAFahlenkampD, et al.
Urolithiasis through the ages: data on more than 200,000 urinary stone analyses.J Urol2011;
185: 1304–1311.
4.
GormanSPTunneyMM.Assessment of encrustation behaviour on urinary tract biomaterials.J Biomater Appl1997;
12: 136–166.
5.
GrasesFSöhnelOCosta-BauzáA, et al.
Study on concretions developed around urinary catheters and mechanisms of renal calculi development. Nephron2001;
88: 320–328.
6.
Alberto T. Calcolosi urinaria e infezione [Urinary calculi and infection]. Urologia2011;
81: 93–98.
7.
WarrenJWMuncieHLHebelJR, et al.
Long-term urethral catheterization increases risk of chronic pyelonephritis and renal inflammation. J Am Geriatr Soc1994;
42: 1286–1290.
8.
SaurTMorinEHabouzitF, et al.
Impact of wall shear stress on initial bacterial adhesion in rotating annular reactor. PLoS One2017;
12: e0172113.
9.
LecuyerSRusconiRShenY, et al.
Shear stress increases the residence time of adhesion of Pseudomonas aeruginosa.Biophys J2011;
100: 341–350.
10.
Mosayyebi Amimeche MietALangeDYueQY, et al.
Reducing deposition of encrustation in ureteric stents by changing the stent architecture: a microfluidic-based investigation.Biomicrofluidics2019;
13: 014101.
11.
De GraziaALutherynGMeghdadiA, et al.
A microfluidic-based investigation of bacterial attachment in ureteral stents. Micromachines2020;
11: 408.
12.
YuanHQianBChenH, et al.
The influence of conditioning film on antifouling properties of the polyurethane film modified by chondroitin sulfate in urine. Appl Surf Sci2017;
426: 587–596.
13.
Razvi H. Ureteral stent coatings: What's here and what's coming. In: AIP Conference Proceedings on AIP RENAL STONE DISEASE 2: 2nd international urolithiasis research symposium (ed A P Evan), Indianapolis, America, 17-18 April 2008, volume 1049, pp.182--185. New York: AIP.
14.
StensballeJLoomsDNielsenPN, et al.
Hydrophilic-coated catheters for intermittent catheterisation reduce urethral micro trauma: A prospective, randomised, participant-blinded, crossover study of three different types of catheters.Eur Urol2005;
48: 978–983.
15.
DioknoACMitchellBANashAJ, et al.
Patient satisfaction and the lofric catheter for clean intermittent catheterization.J Urol1995;
153: 349–351.
16.
NurdinNWeilandtETextorM, et al.
Reduced frictional resistance of polyurethane catheter by means of a surface coating procedure. J Appl Polym Sci1996;
61: 1939–1948.
17.
KoRCadieuxPADalsinJL, et al.
First prize: novel uropathogen-resistant coatings inspired by marine mussels.J Endourol2008;
22: 1153–1160.
18.
CaudaVChiodoniALaurentiM, et al.
Ureteral double-J stents performances toward encrustation after long-term indwelling in a dynamic in vitro model. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater 2017; 105: 2244-2253.
19.
AugeBFerraroRMadenjianA, et al.
Evaluation of a dissolvable ureteral drainage stent in a swine model. J Urol2002;
168: 808–812.
20.
WangXZhangLChenQ, et al.
A nanostructured degradable ureteral stent fabricated by electrospinning for upper urinary tract reconstruction.J Nanosci Nanotechnol2015;
15: 9899–9904.
21.
QiuR-XLiC-MYeL, et al.
Electrospinning of synthesized triblock copolymers of ε-caprolactone and L-lactide for the application of vascular tissue engineering.Biomed Mater2009;
4: 044105.
22.
LiXSuYHeC, et al.
Sorbitan monooleate and poly(L-lactide-co-ε-caprolactone) electrospun nanofibers for endothelial cell interactions.J Biomed Mater Res Part A2009;
91A: 878–885.
23.
KemppainenETaljaMRiiheläM, et al.
A bioresorbable urethral stent – an experimental study.Urol Res1993;
21: 235–238.
24.
PetasAKärkkäinenPTaljaM, et al.
Effects of biodegradable self-reinforced polyglycolic acid, poly-DL-lactic acid and stainless-steel spiral stents on uroepithelium after Nd: YAG laser irradiation of the canine prostate.Br J Urol1998;
80: 903–907.
25.
PetasATaljaMTammelaTLJ, et al.
The biodegradable self-reinforced poly-DL-lactic acid spiral stent compared with a suprapubic catheter in the treatment of post-operative urinary retention after visual laser ablation of the prostate.Br J Urol1997;
80: 439–443.
26.
TammelaTLJTaljaMPetasA, et al.
Bioabsorbable spiral stents in the urethra. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl1996;
179: 97–100.
27.
LumiahoJHeinoAPietiläinenT, et al.
The morphological, in situ effects of a self-reinforced bioabsorbable polylactide (SR-PLA 96) ureteric stent; an experimental study.J Urol2000;
164: 1360–1363.
28.
AthanasiouKAgrawalCBarberFA, et al.
Orthopaedic application for PLA–PGA biodegradable polymers.Arthroscopy1998;
14: 726–737.
29.
SinhaPMathurSSharmaP, et al.
Potential of pine needles for PLA-based composites. Polym Compos2016;
39: 1339-1349.
30.
FeijooJFukushimaKYangM-C.Comparison of abiotic and biotic degradation of PDLLA, PCL and partially miscible PDLLA/PCL blend. Eur Polym J2013;
49: 706–717.
31.
HakkarainenM.Aliphatic polyesters: abiotic and biotic degradation and degradation products. Degradable aliphatic polyesters.
Berlin:
Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002, pp. 113–138.
32.
MarcoMorra.
On the molecular basis of fouling resistance.J Biomater Sci Polym Ed2000;
11: 547–569.
33.
ErturkESessionsAJosephJ.Impact of ureteral stent diameter on symptoms and tolerability.J Endourol Endourol Soc2003;
17: 59–62.
34.
YangGXieHHuangY, et al.
Immersed multilayer biodegradable ureteral stent with reformed biodegradation: an in vitro experiment.J Biomater Appl2017;
31: 1235–1244.
35.
ZimskindPFetterTWilkersonJ.Clinical use of long-term indwelling silicone rubber ureteral splints inserted cystoscopically.J Urol1967;
97: 840–844.
36.
JonesDDjokicJMcCoyC, et al.
Poly(ɛ-caprolactone) and poly(ɛ-caprolactone)-polyvinylpyrrolidone-iodine blends as ureteral biomaterials: characterisation of mechanical and surface properties, degradation and resistance to encrustation in vitro. Biomaterials2003;
23: 4449–4458.
37.
GormanSJonesDBonnerM, et al.
Mechanical performance of polyurethane ureteral stents in vitro and ex vivo.Biomaterials1997;
18: 1379–1383.
38.
TunneyMJonesDGormanS.Biofilm and biofilm-related encrustation of urinary tract devices. Methods Enzymol1999;
310: 558–566.
39.
NejadnikMRvan der MeiHCNordeW, et al.
Bacterial adhesion and growth on a polymer brush-coating.Biomaterials2008;
29: 4117–4121.
40.
TonchevaAMinchevaRKanchevaM, et al.
Antibacterial PLA/PEG electrospun fibers: comparative study between grafting and blending PEG. Eur Polym J2016;
75: 223–233.
41.
XingyiLKongXShiS, et al.
Biodegradable MPEG-g-chitosan and methoxy poly(ethylene glycol)-b-poly(ɛ-caprolactone) composite films: part 1. Preparation and characterization. Carbohydr Polym2010;
79: 429–436.
42.
AvgoustaκisKBeletsiAPanagiZ, et al.
PLGA-mPEG nanoparticles of cisplatin: in vitro nanoparticle degradation, in vitro drug release and in vivo drug residence in blood properties. J Control Release2002;
79: 123–135.
43.
ParkJParkSParkJ, et al.
Preparation and characterization of biodegradable and hemocompatible copolymers.React Funct Polym2019;
146: 104373.
44.
BáezJMarcos-FernándezA.Degradable poly(ester-etherurethane)s derived of AB 2 miktoarm star copolymer poly(ethylene glycol-(-caprolactone) 2) diol: synthesis, characterization and degradation. React Funct Polym2012;
72: 349–357.
45.
JeongSKimB-SLeeYM, et al.
Morphology of elastic poly (l-lactide-co-ε-caprolactone) copolymers and in vitro and in vivo degradation behavior of their scaffolds.Biomacromolecules2004;
5: 1303–1309.
46.
VapnekJMaynardFKimJ.A prospective randomized trial of the lofric hydrophilic coated catheter versus conventional plastic catheter for clean intermittent catheterization.J Urol2003;
169: 994–998.
47.
GormanSTunneyMKeaneP, et al.
Characterization and assessment of a novel poly(ethylene oxide)/polyurethane composite hydrogel (Aquavene®) as a ureteral stent biomaterial. J Biomed Mater Res1998;
39: 642–649.
48.
GormanSPGarvinCPQuigleyF, et al.
Design and validation of a dynamic flow model simulating encrustation of biomaterials in the urinary tract.J Pharm Pharmacol2003;
55: 461–468.
49.
SchierholzJRMYücelNRumpAFE, et al.
Antiinfective and encrustation-inhibiting materials—myth and facts. Int J Antimicrob Agents2002;
19: 511–516.
50.
BroomfieldRJMorganSDKhanA, et al.
Crystalline bacterial biofilm formation on urinary catheters by urease-producing urinary tract pathogens: a simple method of control.J Med Microbiol2009;
58: 1367–1375.
51.
HildebrandtPSayyadMRzanyA, et al.
Prevention of surface encrustation of urological implants by coating with inhibitors.Biomaterials2001;
22: 503–507.
52.
HildebrandtPRzanyABolzA, et al.
Immobilisiertes Heparin als inkrustierungsresistente Beschichtung auf urologischen Implantaten [Immobilized heparin as an encrustation-resistant coating on urological implants]. Biomed Tech1997;
42: 123–124.
53.
MengFQiaoZYaoY, et al.
Synthesis of polyurethanes with pendant azide groups attached on the soft segments and the surface modification with mPEG by click chemistry for antifouling applications. RSC Adv2018;
8: 19642–19650.
54.
BayusenoAPSchmahlWW.Hydrothermal synthesis of struvite and its phase transition: impacts of pH, heating and subsequent cooling methods. J Cryst Growth2018; 498: 336-345.
55.
HobbsTSchultzLNLauchnorEG, et al.
Evaluation of biofilm induced urinary infection stone formation in a novel laboratory model system.J Urol2018;
199: 178–185.
56.
KhandwekarADobleM.Physicochemical characterisation and biological evaluation of polyvinylpyrrolidone-iodine engineered polyurethane (Tecoflex®). J Mater Sci Mater Med2011;
22: 1231–1246.
57.
SticklerDJKingJNettletonJ, et al.
Structure of urinary catheter encrusting bacterial biofilms. Cells Mater1993;
3: 315–320.
AtmaniFKhanSR.Characterization of uronic-acid-rich inhibitor of calcium oxalate crystallization isolated from rat urine.Urol Res1995;
23: 95–101.
60.
MiyakeOYoshiokaTYoshimuraK, et al.
Expression of Tamm-Horsfall protein in stone-forming rat models.Br J Urol1998;
81: 14–19.
61.
GriffithDPMusherDMItinC.Urease. The primary cause of infection-induced urinary stones. Investig Urol1976;
13: 346–350.
62.
BanerjeeIPanguleRKaneR.Antifouling coatings: recent developments in the design of surfaces that prevent fouling by proteins, bacteria, and marine organisms.Adv Mater2011;
23: 690–718.
63.
RoosjenAvan der MeiHBusscherH, et al.
Microbial adhesion to poly(ethylene oxide) brushes: influence of polymer chain length and temperature.Langmuir2005;
20: 10949–10955.
64.
ParkKKimYSHanD, et al.
Bacterial adhesion on PEG-modified polyurethane surface. Biomaterials1998;
19: 851–859.
65.
DongBManolacheSWongA, et al.
Antifouling ability of polyethylene glycol of different molecular weights grafted onto polyester surfaces by cold plasma. Polym Bull2011;
66: 517–528.
66.
Hezi-yamitASullivanCWongJ, et al.
Impact of polymer hydrophilicity on biocompatibility: implication for DES polymer design.J Biomed Mater Res Part A2009;
90: 133–141.
67.
KuoZ-KFangM-YWuT-Y, et al.
Hydrophilic films: how hydrophilicity affects blood compatibility and cellular compatibility.Adv Polym Technol 2018; 37: 1635-1642.
