4.5 Article

Hydrophilization of synthetic biodegradable polymer scaffolds for improved cell/tissue compatibility

Journal

BIOMEDICAL MATERIALS
Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1748-6041/8/1/014101

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Korea Ministry of Health and Welfare [2011-A100140]
  2. Korea Health Promotion Institute [A100140] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Porous scaffolds have been widely used in tissue engineering because they can guide cells and tissues to grow, synthesize extracellular matrix and other biological molecules, and facilitate the formation of functional tissues and organs. Although various natural and synthetic biodegradable polymers have been used to fabricate the scaffolds, synthetic polymers have been more widely used for scaffolds since they have good mechanical strength, reproducible/controllable mechanical-chemical properties, and controllable biodegradation rates. However, the 'hydrophobic character' of common synthetic polymers is considered a limitation for tissue engineering applications because it can lead to a low initial cell seeding density, heterogeneous cell distribution in the scaffold, and slow cell growth due to insufficient absorption/diffusion of cell culture medium into scaffold and lack of specific interaction sites with cells. The hydrophilization of porous synthetic polymer scaffolds has been considered as one of the simple but effective approaches to achieve desirable in vitro cell culture and in vivo tissue regeneration within the scaffolds. In this review paper, representative synthetic biodegradable polymers and techniques to fabricate porous scaffolds are briefly summarized and their hydrophilization techniques to improve cell/tissue compatibility are discussed.

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