Skip to main content
. 2018 Apr 28;19(5):1319. doi: 10.3390/ijms19051319

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Comparison of angiogenic response after orthotropic implantation of DD vs. ePTFE. White line marks the normal diaphragm (ND) versus the patch (decellularized diaphragm –DD- or plastic –ePTFE- or capsule expanded –cePTFE-) (A) Immunofluorescence staining against CD31 and Laminin performed in explanted DD and ePTFE after 7 and 15 days from implantation; nuclei were counterstained with DAPI; (B) Quantification of CD31+ cells over total cell content in explanted DD and ePTFE after 7 and 15 days from implantation (mean ± SD); (C) Immunofluorescence staining against vWF and αSMA performed in explanted DD and ePTFE after 7 and 15 days from implantation; nuclei were counterstained with DAPI; (D) αSMA+/vWF+ vessels dimension distribution calculated in fresh tissue, DD and ePTFE after 7 and 15 days from implantation. Symbol legend. Black dots: vessel dimension of the fresh diaphragm (control); black and white squares: vessel dimension 7 days post implant; black and white triangles: vessel dimension 15 days post implant. Scale bar = 100 µm. * p < 0.01; ** p < 0.001; *** p < 0.0001.