4.5 Article

Synthesis, characterization, and biocompatibility of alternating block polyurethanes based on PLA and PEG

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL MATERIALS RESEARCH PART A
Volume 102, Issue 9, Pages 3243-3254

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.35004

Keywords

poly(L-lactic acid); poly(ethylene glycol); alternating block polyurethane; preparation; biocompatibility

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation of China [2047001, 81172894, 21274083]
  2. Li Ka Shing Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A series of alternating block polyurethanes (abbreviated as PULA-alt-PEG) and random block polyurethanes (abbreviated as PULA-ran-PEG) based on poly(L-lactic acid) (PLA) and poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) were synthesized. The differences of PULA-alt/ran-PEG chemical structure, molecular weight, distribution, thermal properties, mechanical properties and static contact angle were systematically investigated. The PULA-alt/ran-PEG polyurethanes exhibited low T-g (-47.3 similar to -34.4 degrees C), wide mechanical properties (stress sigma(t): 4.6-32.6 MPa, modulus E: 11.4-323.9 MPa and strain epsilon: 468-1530%) and low water contact angle (35.4-51.4 degrees). Scanning electron microscope (SEM) observation showed that PULA-alt-PEG film displays rougher and more patterned surface morphology than PULA-ran-PEG does, due to more regular structures of PULA-alt-PEG. Hydrolytic degradation shows that degradation rate of random block polyurethane series PULA-ran-PEG is higher than the alternating counterpart PULA-alt-PEG. PLA segment degradation is faster than urethane linkage and PEG segment almost does not degrade in the buffer solution. Platelet adhesion study showed that all the polyurethanes possess excellent hemocompatibility. The cell culture assay revealed that PULA-alt/ran-PEG polyurethanes were cell inert and unfavorable for the attachment of rat glial cell due to the hydrophilic characters of the materials. (C) 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available