4.8 Article

Healing kinetics of microneedle-formed pores in PLGA films

Journal

JOURNAL OF CONTROLLED RELEASE
Volume 171, Issue 2, Pages 172-177

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2013.06.035

Keywords

PLGA; Glass-transition temperature; Surface tension; Self-healing materials; Surface pores; Viscoelasticity

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation's National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network
  2. NIH [R21 EBsquare08873]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The spontaneous healing of aqueous pores in poly(D,L-lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) drug delivery systems has been identified to play a key role in terminating the burst release of large molecules, and to provide a means for novel aqueous-based microencapsulation. To examine healing of PLGA, pores were created of defined size and depth on the surface of thin PLGA films by stamping with blunt-tip microneedles. Pore dimensions on the micron-scale were relevant to surface pores of common PLGA microspheres and could be easily monitored by light microscopy. Most pores healed reproducibly at temperatures above the glass-transition temperature (T-g) of the films, with healing times decreasing sharply with increasing temperature according to Williams-Landel-Ferry (WLF) behavior. It is suggested that healing is driven by high surface tension in the films and occurs through viscoelastic creep. Hydrated films healed at lower temperatures than dry films, consistent with a drop in T-g upon polymer hydration. Larger pores took longer to heal than smaller ones, while pores larger than 20 mu m did not heal before significant polymer degradation occurred. Films of a less hydrophobic PLGA showed slower healing kinetics, attributed to a weaker surface tension driving force. Deeper pores showed signs of in-plane stress from spin-coating, and either ruptured or only partially healed when incubated wet and dry, respectively. (C) 2013 Published by Elsevier B.V.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available