4.6 Article

Chitosan (or alginate)-coated iron oxide nanoparticles: A comparative study

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2014.12.031

Keywords

Alginate coated iron oxide; Chitosan-coated iron oxide; Ferrofluid; Magnetic nanoparticles; Nanostructured materials; Thermal analysis

Funding

  1. Spanish Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad (MINECO) [MAT2012-36270-004-03]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The preparation and characterization of stable aqueous suspensions of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles stabilized with chitosan (CHI) or with alginate (ALG) are reported. Particles of iron oxide were synthesized via a controlled co-precipitation method. The particles obtained had a diameter similar to 12 nm; a value that ensures superparamagnetic properties and their suitability for biomedical applications. The optimal concentration of polymer needed for coating the nanoparticles was determined using adsorption isotherms. When the magnetic nanoparticles were coated with CHI and ALG, their properties were compared through the following measurements: hydrodynamic ratio; zeta-potential; content of polymer coating the particles, by thermogravimetry; magnetic properties; high-resolution transmission electron microscopy; and, finally, their stability in biological media. The ALG-coated nanoparticles had a mean diameter of 50-55 nm, whereas that of the CHI-coated nanoparticles was 80-120 nm. Both types of particles showed similar values of saturation magnetization (59.3 emu g(-1) for ALG-coated nanoparticles; 56.8 emu g(-1) for CHI-coated ones); however, when in contact with human multisera at 37 degrees C, significant differences were observed between the two. The ALG-coated nanopartides were stable for up to 9 days, while the CHI-coated nanoparticles were stable for only 2 days. Agglomeration and phase separation were the main effects observed. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available