4.7 Article

Novel electrospun chitosan/polyvinyl alcohol/zinc oxide nanofibrous mats with antibacterial and antioxidant properties for diabetic wound healing

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.08.057

关键词

Chitosan; Polyvinyl alcohol; Zinc oxide; Electrospinning; Nanofibers; Diabetic wound healing

资金

  1. Qatar National Research Fund (a part of Qatar Foundation) [NPRP9-144-3-021]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Non-healing wound is a serious complication of diabetes, associated with extremely slow wound closure, and a high rate of infection, resulting in amputation or losses of limbs, high health care cost and poor quality of patient's life. In the present study, we hypothesized that nanofiber mats composed of a combination of chitosan, polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) and Zinc oxide (ZnO) could be an effective option for faster healing of diabetic wounds due to the wound healing activities of chitosan-PVA nanofibers and antibacterial properties of ZnO. Nanofiber mats of chitosan, PVA and ZnO were synthesized using electrospinning technique. The developed nanofibrous mats were characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), X-ray diffraction (XRD), antibacterial and antioxidant assays as well as in vivo wound healing experiments in rabbits. The results revealed that chitosan/PVA/ZnO nanofibrous membranes possessed higher antibacterial potential against E. coil, P. aeruginosa, B. subtilis and S. aureus compared to chitosan/PVA nanofibrous membranes. Moreover, chitosan/PVA/ZnO nanofibrous membranes exhibited higher antioxidant potential compared to chitosan/PVA nanofibrous mats. The in vivo wound healing studies showed that chitosan/PVA/ZnO nanofibrous membranes resulted in accelerated wound healing as compared to chitosan/PVA nanofibers. The current study, thus, reveals that chitosan/PVA/ZnO electrospun scaffolds could be effectively helpful in dressings for diabetic wounds. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据