4.8 Article Proceedings Paper

Evaluation of electrospun PCL/gelatin nanofibrous scaffold for wound healing and layered dermal reconstitution

Journal

ACTA BIOMATERIALIA
Volume 3, Issue 3, Pages 321-330

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2007.01.002

Keywords

electrospinning; nanofiber; nanofibrous scaffolds; wound dressing; skin tissue engineering

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The current design requirement for a tissue engineering skin substitute is that of a biodegradable scaffold through which fibroblasts can migrate and populate. This artificial '' dermal layer '' needs to adhere to and integrate with the wound, which is not always successful for the current artificial dermal analogues available. The high cost of these artificial dermal analogues also makes their application prohibitive both to surgeons and patients. We propose a cost-effective composite consisting of a nanofibrous scaffold directly electrospun onto a polyurethane dressing (Tegaderm((TM)), 3M Medical) - which we call the Tegaderm-nanofiber (TG-NF) construct - for dermal wound healing. Cell culture is performed on both sides of the nanofibrous scaffold and tested for fibroblast adhesion and proliferation. It is hoped that these studies will result in a fibroblast-populated three-dimensional dermal analogue that is feasible for layered applications to build up thickness of dermis prior to re-epithelialization. Results obtained in this study suggest that both the TG-NF construct and dual-sided fibroblast-populated nanofiber construct achieved significant cell adhesion, growth and proliferation. This is a successful first step for the nanofiber construct in establishing itself as a suitable three-dimensional scaffold for autogenous fibroblast populations, and providing great potential in the treatment of dermal wounds through layered application. (C) 2007 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available