4.6 Article

Fabrication and Characterization of Natural Origin Chitosan-Gelatin-Alginate Composite Scaffold by Foaming Method Without Using Surfactant

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED POLYMER SCIENCE
卷 127, 期 4, 页码 3228-3241

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/app.37755

关键词

foam; polymer; composite; tissue engineering; scaffold; surfactant

资金

  1. Council of Scientific and Educational Research [27(0222)/1 O/EM R-II]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A natural origin tripolymer scaffold from chitosan, gelatin, and alginate was fabricated by applying foaming method without adding any foam stabilizing surfactant. Previously, in foaming method of scaffold fabrication, toxic surfactants were used to stabilize the foam, but in this work, the use of surfactant has been avoided strictly, which can provide better environment for cellular response and viability. In foaming method, stable foam is produced simply by agitating the polymer (alginate-gelatin) solution, and the foam is crosslinked with CaCl2, glutaraldehyde, and chitosan to produce tripolymer alginate-gelatin-chitosan composite scaffold. Microscopic images of the composite scaffold revealed the presence of interconnected pores, mostly spread over the entire surface of the scaffold. The scaffold has a porosity of 90% with a mean pore size of 57 mu m. Swelling and degradation studies of the scaffold showed that the scaffold possesses excellent properties of hydrophilicity and biodegradability. In vitro cell culture studies by seeding L929 mouse fibroblast cells on scaffold revealed excellent cell viability, proliferation rate and adhesion as indicated by MTT assay, DNA quantification, and phase contrast microscopy of cell-scaffold construct. The natural origin composite scaffold fabricated by the simplest method i.e., foaming method, but without adding any surfactant, is cheap, biocompatible, and it might find potential applications in the field of tissue engineering. (C) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 127: 3228-3241, 2013

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

4.6
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