journal article·2024-05-22Open access

Nanohydroxyapatite Coating Attenuates Fibrotic and Immune Responses to Promote Keratoprosthesis Biointegration in Advanced Ocular Surface Disorders

Arun J. Thirunavukarasu, Fernando Morales-Wong, Nuur Shahinda Humaira binte Halim, Evelina Han, Siew Kwan Koh, Lei Zhou, Viridiana Kocaba, Subramanian Venkatraman, Jodhbir S. Mehta, Andri K. Riau

ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces· Volume 16· Issue 20

Abstract

Keratoprosthesis (KPro) implantation is frequently the only recourse for patients with severe corneal disease. However, problems arise due to inadequate biointegration of the KPro, particularly the PMMA optical cylinder, such as tissue detachment, tissue melting, or eye-threatening infection in the interface. Here, using the AuroKPro as a model prosthesis, a surface functionalization approach─coating the optical cylinder with nanohydroxyapatite (nHAp)─was trialed in rabbit eyes with and without a proceeding chemical injury. In chemically injured eyes, which simulated total limbal epithelial stem cell deficiency, clear benefits were conferred by the coating. The total modified Hackett–McDonald score and area of tissue apposition differences 12 weeks after implantation were 5.0 and 22.5%, respectively. Mechanical push-in tests revealed that 31.8% greater work was required to detach the tissues. These differences were less marked in uninjured eyes, which showed total score and tissue apposition differences of 2.5 and 11.5%, respectively, and a work difference of 23.5%. The improved biointegration could be contributed by the attenuated expression of fibronectin ( p = 0.036), collagen 3A1 ( p = 0.033), and α-smooth muscle actin ( p = 0.045)─proteins typically upregulated during nonadherent fibrous capsule envelopment of bioinert material─adjacent to the optical cylinders. The coating also appeared to induce a less immunogenic milieu in the ocular surface tissue, evidenced by the markedly lower expression of tear proteins associated with immune and stimulus responses. Collectively, the level of these tear proteins in eyes with coated prostheses was 1.1 ± 13.0% of naïve eyes: substantially lower than with noncoated KPros (246.5 ± 79.3% of naïve, p = 0.038). Together, our results indicated that nHAp coating may reduce the risk of prosthesis failure in severely injured eyes, which are representative of the cohort of KPro patients.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Corneal Surgery and Treatments · Ocular Surface and Contact Lens · Corneal surgery and disorders

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Tissue Engineering and Cell Therapy Group

Singapore Eye Research Institute

Oxford University Clinical Academic Graduate School

University of Oxford

Singapore National Eye Centre

Autonomous University of Nuevo Leon

Ocular Proteomics Group

Department of Applied Biology and Chemical Technology

Hong Kong Polytechnic University

Centre for Eye and Vision Research

Department of Materials Science and Engineering

National University of Singapore

iHealthTech

Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences Academic Clinical Programme

Duke-NUS Medical School

Funding

Duke-NUS Medical School · SingHealth Foundation

References (57)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2015.477610.1001/jamaophthalmol.2015.4776 ↗
2. 10.1080/02713683.2019.166387410.1080/02713683.2019.1663874 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.actbio.2018.01.02310.1016/j.actbio.2018.01.023 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.actbio.2023.07.05310.1016/j.actbio.2023.07.053 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.exer.2018.05.01010.1016/j.exer.2018.05.010 ↗
6. 10.1001/archopht.121.8.108710.1001/archopht.121.8.1087 ↗
7. 10.2147/OPTH.S2708310.2147/OPTH.S27083 ↗
8. 10.3129/i08-00910.3129/i08-009 ↗
9. 10.1146/annurev-vision-100820-02125310.1146/annurev-vision-100820-021253 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.ajo.2019.03.01610.1016/j.ajo.2019.03.016 ↗
11. 10.1002/btm2.1030010.1002/btm2.10300 ↗
12. 10.1093/rb/rbz04410.1093/rb/rbz044 ↗
13. 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-31759810.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-317598 ↗
14. 10.1016/S0142-9612(98)00069-610.1016/S0142-9612(98)00069-6 ↗
15. 10.1590/S0004-2749201100020001210.1590/S0004-27492011000200012 ↗
16. 10.1097/00003226-200307000-0000710.1097/00003226-200307000-00007 ↗
17. 10.1155/2014/19682710.1155/2014/196827 ↗
18. 10.1097/ICO.000000000000083710.1097/ICO.0000000000000837 ↗
19. 10.1007/s10856-014-5347-510.1007/s10856-014-5347-5 ↗
20. 10.1097/00003086-198712000-0001410.1097/00003086-198712000-00014 ↗
21. 10.1167/iovs.11-760110.1167/iovs.11-7601 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.jma.2023.09.03310.1016/j.jma.2023.09.033 ↗
23. 10.1371/journal.pone.011150310.1371/journal.pone.0111503 ↗
24. 10.2147/IJN.S24550010.2147/IJN.S245500 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.actbio.2020.01.02310.1016/j.actbio.2020.01.023 ↗
26. 10.3390/ma1211179510.3390/ma12111795 ↗
27. 10.3390/nano1011216210.3390/nano10112162 ↗
28. 10.1097/ICO.000000000000135210.1097/ICO.0000000000001352 ↗
29. 10.1007/s11666-020-01009-610.1007/s11666-020-01009-6 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2021.12709810.1016/j.surfcoat.2021.127098 ↗
31. 10.1021/acsami.6b1237110.1021/acsami.6b12371 ↗
32. Du Y. · Mol. Vision · 2003 · 9 · 635
33. 10.1097/00003226-200308000-0000910.1097/00003226-200308000-00009 ↗
34. 10.1167/iovs.09-386010.1167/iovs.09-3860 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.exer.2004.08.00210.1016/j.exer.2004.08.002 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.actbio.2023.09.00210.1016/j.actbio.2023.09.002 ↗
37. 10.1167/iovs.18-2576110.1167/iovs.18-25761 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.12.00910.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.12.009 ↗
39. 10.1093/rb/rbv01410.1093/rb/rbv014 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2009.11.01210.1016/j.colsurfb.2009.11.012 ↗
41. 10.1021/acsami.5b0762110.1021/acsami.5b07621 ↗
42. 10.1002/admi.20190076710.1002/admi.201900767 ↗
43. 10.1097/ICL.000000000000064110.1097/ICL.0000000000000641 ↗
44. 10.1016/j.trsl.2021.05.00510.1016/j.trsl.2021.05.005 ↗
45. 10.3390/polym1210219810.3390/polym12102198 ↗
46. 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2014.195910.1001/jamaophthalmol.2014.1959 ↗
47. 10.3390/pathogens803009310.3390/pathogens8030093 ↗
48. 10.1039/C7TB02363D10.1039/C7TB02363D ↗
49. 10.1002/jbm.82028111510.1002/jbm.820281115 ↗
50. 10.1002/jbm.b.3109610.1002/jbm.b.31096 ↗
51. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.11.02510.1016/j.ophtha.2012.11.025 ↗
52. 10.1016/j.ajo.2021.05.02210.1016/j.ajo.2021.05.022 ↗
53. 10.1177/039139881876234910.1177/0391398818762349 ↗
54. 10.1089/jop.2017.010810.1089/jop.2017.0108 ↗
55. 10.1038/s41598-018-35096-x10.1038/s41598-018-35096-x ↗
56. 10.1016/j.euprot.2015.02.00210.1016/j.euprot.2015.02.002 ↗
57. 10.1186/gb-2003-4-5-p310.1186/gb-2003-4-5-p3 ↗