4.5 Article

Characterization of a slowly degrading biodegradable polyesterurethane for tissue engineering scaffolds

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL MATERIALS RESEARCH PART A
Volume 82A, Issue 3, Pages 669-679

Publisher

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.31094

Keywords

electrospinning; solvent casting; tissue engineering; scaffold; cell viability

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this research was to develop and characterize a novel, slowly degrading polyester-urethane. In this study, a polyesterurethane with a crystalline segment of poly((R)-3-hydroxybutyric acid)-diol linked by a diisocyanate to an amorphous segment of poly(epsilon-caprolactone-co-glycolide)-diol was synthesized. Porous and nonporous scaffolds were processed using electrospinning and solvent casting respectively. The morphology, pore size, and filament diameter of the mesh and film were characterized using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The thermal properties were examined using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). A degradation study was initiated to characterize the change in mechanical properties, molecular weight, and surface morpholopy over 12 months using tensile testing, gel permeation chromatography (GPC), and SEM respectively. Concomitantly, cell morphology and viability on these variants were investigated using fibroblasts. The mechanical test data indicated a gradual decrease in the ultimate tensile strength and strain to break while the modulus of elasticity remained stable. GPC data suggested a slow decrease in the molecular weight while SEM examination revealed changed surface morphologies. The in vitro studies implied that the novel polyesterurethane was not cytotoxic and that the mesh was a more favorable scaffold towards cell viability. The summation of these results suggests that this polyesterurethane has the potential for tissue engineering applications. (C) 2007 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