Welcome to the new version of CaltechAUTHORS. Login is currently restricted to library staff. If you notice any issues, please email coda@library.caltech.edu
Published June 2017 | public
Journal Article

Parylene scaffold for cartilage lesion


Evaluate parylene scaffold feasibility in cartilage lesion treatment, introducing a novel paradigm combining a reparative and superficial reconstructive procedure. Fifteen rabbits were used. All animals had both knees operated and the same osteochondral lesion model was created bilaterally. The parylene scaffold was implanted in the right knee, and the left knee of the same animal was used as control. The animals were euthanized at different time points after surgery: four animals at three weeks, three animals at six weeks, four animals at nine weeks, and four animals at 12 weeks. Specimens were analyzed by International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) macroscopic evaluation, modified Pineda histologic evaluation of cartilage repair, and collagen II immunostaining. Parylene knees were compared to its matched contra-lateral control knees of the same animal using the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank. ICRS mean ± SD values for parylene versus control, three, six, nine and twelve weeks, respectively: 7.83 ± 1.85 versus 4.42 ± 1.08, p = 0.0005; 10.17 ± 1.17 versus 6.83 ± 1.17, p = 0.03; 10.89 ± 0.60 versus 7.33 ± 2.18, p = 0.007; 10.67 ± 0.78 versus 7.83 ± 3.40, p = 0.03. Modified Pineda mean ± SD values for parylene versus control, six, nine and twelve weeks, respectively: 3.37 ± 0.87 versus 6.94 ± 1.7, p < 0.0001; 5.73 ± 2.05 versus 6.41 ± 1.7, p = 0.007; 3.06 ± 1.61 versus 6.52 ± 1.51, p < 0.0001. No inflammation was seen. Parylene implanted knees demonstrated higher collagen II expression via immunostaining in comparison to the control knees. Parylene scaffolds are a feasible option for cartilage lesion treatment and the combination of a reparative to a superficial reconstructive procedure using parylene scaffolds led to better results than the reparative procedure alone.

Additional Information

© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media New York. First Online: 08 April 2017. This study was supported by Vangsness Research Fund from Keck School of Medicine – University of Southern California. Franciozi CE received post-doctoral scholarship from Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo - FAPESP (grant# 2015/08952-6) supporting his scientific activities at the University of Southern California from 2015 to 2016. The authors would like to thank FAPESP, Andrea Moon, James D. Weiland, Yi Zhang, Ellis Troy, Doris Lee, Fernando Gallardo, Lina Flores, Luis V. Jimenez, Alex Mcintyre, Ian Jones, Andrea Zanetti, Samantha L. Brims, James Finlay, Sumanth Putta, Sean Veal, Mario Rogel, Ziri Sadai Quikano, Joshua Siyoung Lee, Cecilia Melendres, Susanne Vaage, Sheila McNeil Ingham, Roseli Paschoa, Mario Ferretti, Flavio Faloppa and Paulo Rodrigues. Without the help, support, and enthusiasm of all of these people, this work would not have been possible. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Statement on the welfare of animals: Ethical approval: All applicable international and institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. All procedures performed were done in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution at which the study was conducted and was approved by its Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.

Additional details

August 21, 2023
October 25, 2023