4.7 Article

Degradation of electrospun SF/P(LLA-CL) blended nanofibrous scaffolds in vitro

Journal

POLYMER DEGRADATION AND STABILITY
Volume 96, Issue 12, Pages 2266-2275

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2011.08.011

Keywords

Degradation in vitro; SF/P(LLA-CL) nanofibrous scaffolds; Mechanism; Tissue repair

Funding

  1. Science and Technology Commission of Jiaxing Municipality [2010AY1089]
  2. Jiaxing University [70110X10BL]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31070871]
  4. National Plan for Science Technology [10NAN1013-02]
  5. International Corporation of Shanghai Municipality [10410702200]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nanofibrous scaffolds of silk fibroin (SF) and poly(L-lactic acid-co-epsilon-caprolactone) (P(LLA-CL)) blends fabricated via electrospinning possessed good mechanical property and biocompatibility, as demonstrated by a previous study in vitro. However, the degradation behavior of the scaffolds, which may significantly influence tissue repair and regeneration, needs further exploration. In this study, in vitro degradation of pure SF, P(LLA-CL) and SF/P(LLA-CL) blended nanofibrous scaffolds were performed in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS, pH 7.4 +/- 0.1) at 37 degrees C for 6 months. A series of analyses and characterizations (including morphologic changes, loss weight, pH changes of PBS solutions, DSC, XRD and FTIR-ATR) were conducted to the nanofibrous scaffolds after degradation and the results showed that the pure SF nanofibrous scaffolds were not completely degradable in PBS while pure P(LLA-CL) nanofibrous scaffolds had the fastest degradation rate. Moreover, the addition of SF reduced the degradation rate of P(LLA-CL) in SF/P(LLA-CL) blended nanofibrous scaffolds. This was probably caused by the intermolecular interactions between SF and P(LLA-CL), which hindered the movement of P(LLA-CL) molecular chains. (C) 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available