Fig. 7: Antithrombogenicity and biochemical analysis of the pCBM/pSB hydrogel coatings in the rabbit model.

a Scheme of the New Zealand white rabbits veno-venous extracorporeal circuit. b Photographs, (c) cross-section, SEM images of (d) PVC tubing, and (e) pCBM/pSB hydrogel coating modified PVC tubing after 2 h of circulation. Measurements in (d, e) were repeated three times independently with similar results. The quantitative results of f occlusion rate (n = 9), (g) thrombus weight (n = 3), (h) blood flow rate (n = 3), coagulation test of (i) TT (thrombin time) (n = 3), (j) APTT (activated partial thromboplastin time) (n = 3), and (k) PT (prothrombin time) (n = 3). The inflammatory cytokines level of (l) TNF-α (tumor necrosis factor-α) (n = 4) and (m) creatinine (CRE) (n = 3) in PVC tubing with/without pCBM/pSB hydrogel coating at the end of the circulation experiments. Data presented as mean ± SD and analyzed using a one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc test in (f–m), *P< 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, n.s.: no significant difference at P > 0.05. f P < 0.001 (PVC vs pCBM/pSB, occlusion rate). g P = 0.0087 (PVC vs pCBM/pSB, thrombus weight). h P =  0.0121 (PVC vs pCBM/pSB, blood flow rate). i P = 0.0055 (control vs PVC, APTT), P = 0.0002 (PVC vs pCBM/pSB, APTT). k P = 0.0076 (control vs PVC, PT), P = 0.0365 (PVC vs pCBM/pSB, PT). l P = 0.0478 (control vs PVC, TNF-α), P = 0.0099 (PVC vs pCBM/pSB, TNF-α). m P = 0.4031 (control vs PVC, CRE), P = 0.7922 (PVC vs pCBM/pSB, CRE), P = 0.1038 (control vs pCBM/pSB, CRE). Source data are provided as a Source Data file.