Small Intestinal Submucosa as a Vascular Graft: A Review

References

• Wright C B, Dunn E J, Ketterhagen J P, Callard G M, Flege J B. The regulatory environment for vascular grafts. Modern Vascular Grafts, P N Sawyer. McGraw-Hill, New York 1987; 105–114
   Google Scholar
• Dagan R, Kott I, Schechter I, Bassat M B, Kaplan I. Glutaraldehyde treated cat small bowel as an arterial graft. Vas Surg July, 1983; 199–206
   Google Scholar
• Lawler M R, Foster J H, Scott H W. Evaluation of canine intestinal submucosa as a vascular substitute. Am J Surg 1971; 122: 517–519
   Google Scholar
• Matsumoto T, Holmes R H, Burdick C D. The fate of the inverted segment of small bowel used for the replacement of major veins. Surgery 1966; 60: 739–743
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burch H P, Schmidt E, Sperling M. Rekonstrukton des arteriellen strombahn durch antologe intestinale muskeltrauplante blin hund. Folia Angiol 1981; 29: 65–72
   Google Scholar
• Fraser R E, Halseth W L, Johnson B, Paton B C. Experimental replacement of the superior vena cava. Arch Surg 1968; 96: 378–385
   Google Scholar
• Broil R, Wenzel W, Burch H P, Franke S, Lang J, Schroter G. Replacement of dog's aorta by autologous intestinal muscle in the infected retroperitoneum. Eur Surg Res 1986; 18: 390–396
   Google Scholar
• Ferris P J, Magassy C L. Replacement of infected arterial prosthesis with inverted jejunal autografts. Am Surg 1969; 35: 681–687
   Google Scholar
• Ferris P J, Magassy C L. Long-term results of replacement of infected arterial prosthesis with jejunal autografts. Am Surg 1972; 37: 373–376
   Google Scholar
• Krahwinkel D J, Richardson D C. Surgery of the small intestine. Current Techniques in Small Animal Surgery, 4th ed, M J Bojrab. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia 1983; 162–174
   Google Scholar
• Badylak S F, Lantz G C, Coffey A C, Geddes L A. Small intestine submucosa as a large diameter vascular graft in the dog. J Surg Res 1989; 47: 74–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lantz G C, Badylak S F, Coffey A C, Geddes L A, Blevins W E. Small intestinal submucosa as a small-diameter arterial graft in the dog. J Invest Surg 1990; 3: 217–227
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lantz G C, Badylak S F, Coffey A C, Geddes L A, Sandusky G E. Small intestine submucosa as a cranial (superior) vena cava graft in the dog. J Surg Res 1992; 53: 175–181
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veith F J, Gupta S K, Wengerter K R, Rivers S P. Critique of alternatives in utilization of autogenous vein. Arterial Surgery New Diagnostic and Operative Techniques, J J Bergan, J S Yao. Grune and Stratton, Orlando, Fla 1988; 447–458
   Google Scholar
• Sandusky G E, Badylak S F, Morff R J, Johnson W D, Lantz G C. Histologic findings after in vivo placement of small intestine submucosal vascular grafts and saphenous vein grafts in the carotid artery in dogs. Amer J Pathol 1992; 140: 317–324
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandusky G E, Macon N D, Badylak S F, Morff R J, Lantz G C. Assessment of vascular grafts after in vivo placement of small intestine submucosal (SIS) grafts and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) grafts in a carotid artery in dogs. Proceed, Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation, Cardiovascular Science and Technology Conference. 1991; 125
   Google Scholar
• Calligaro K D, Veith F J. Diagnosis and management of infected prosthetic aortic grafts: clinical review. Surg 1991; 110: 805–813
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bricker D L, Beall A C, DeBakey M E. The different response to infection of autogenous vein versus dacron arterial prosthesis. Chest 1970; 58: 566–570
   Google Scholar
• Walden R, Italien G J, L'Megerman J, Abbott W M. Matched elastic properties and successful arterial grafting. Arch Surg 1980; 115: 1166–1169
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang L C, Guo X, Tu R, Hwang N HC. Graft compliance and anastomotic flow patterns. Am Soc Artif Intern Organs 1990; 36: 90–94
   Google Scholar
• Snyder R W, Tenny B, Guidon R. Strength and endurance of vascular grafts. Vascular Graft Update: Safety and Performance, H E Kambic, A Kantrowitz. America Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia 1986; 898: 108–121
   Google Scholar
• McClurken M E, McHaney J M, Colone W M. Physical properties and test methods for expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) grafts. Vascular Graft Update: Safety and Performance, H E Kambic, A Kantrowitz. American Society of Testing and Materials, Philadelphia 1986; 898: 82–94
   Google Scholar
• Botzko K M. Porosity testing of polyester vascular grafts. Vascular Graft Update: Safety and Performance, H E Kambic, A Kantrowitz. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia 1986; 122–136
   Google Scholar
• Mathisen S R, Wu H, Sauvage L R, Usui Y, Walker M W. An experimental study of eight current arterial prostheses. J Vasc Surg 1986; 4: 33–41
   Google Scholar
• Roberts G, McCormack H, Ketharanathan V, Macleish D G, et al. The role of physical and chemical characteristics in assessing the performance of a new biological vascular graft. J Biomed Mat Res 1989; 23: 443–450
   Google Scholar
• Wesolow S A. Vascular prosthesis: the need for standards—historical and surgical perspectives. Vascular Graft Update: Safety and Performance, H E Kambic, A Kantrowitz. American Society of Testing and Materials, Philadelphia 1986; 898: 253–277
   Google Scholar
• Wesolowski S A, Fries C C, Karlson K E, DeBakey M E, Sawyer P N. Porosity: primary determinant of ultimate fate of synthetics vascular grafts. Surg 1961; 50: 91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenberg N. The evolution and development of biologic arterial grafts. J Invest Surg 1989; 2: 3–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hamilton G, Megerman J, L'Italien G, et al. Prediction of aneurysm formation in vascular grafts of biologic origin. J Vasc Surg 1988; 7: 400–408
   Google Scholar
• Wallace D G, McPherson J M, Ellingworth L, . Injectable collagen for tissue augmentation. Collagen Biotechnology, M E Nimmi, et al. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla 1988; 118–124
   Google Scholar