4.5 Article

Dry versus hydrated collagen scaffolds: are dry states representative of hydrated states?

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10856-017-6024-2

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. European regional development funds
  2. Research and Development for Innovations Operational Programme (RDIOP) [CZ.1.05/41.00/16.0346]
  3. Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic [Progres Q29/1LF]
  4. state budget of the Czech Republic
  5. GAUK [400215]
  6. Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic [15-25813A]
  7. [RVO: 67985891]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Collagen composite scaffolds have been used for a number of studies in tissue engineering. The hydration of such highly porous and hydrophilic structures may influence mechanical behaviour and porosity due to swelling. The differences in physical properties following hydration would represent a significant limiting factor for the seeding, growth and differentiation of cells in vitro and the overall applicability of such hydrophilic materials in vivo. Scaffolds based on collagen matrix, poly(DL-lactide) nanofibers, calcium phosphate particles and sodium hyaluronate with 8 different material compositions were characterised in the dry and hydrated states using X-ray microcomputed tomography, compression tests, hydraulic permeability measurement, degradation tests and infrared spectrometry. Hydration, simulating the conditions of cell seeding and cultivation up to 48 h and 576 h, was found to exert a minor effect on the morphological parameters and permeability. Conversely, hydration had a major statistically significant effect on the mechanical behaviour of all the tested scaffolds. The elastic modulus and compressive strength of all the scaffolds decreased by similar to 95%. The quantitative results provided confirm the importance of analysing scaffolds in the hydrated rather than the dry state since the former more precisely simulates the real environment for which such materials are designed. [GRAPHICS] .

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