4.7 Article

Biodegradation of polyurethanes and nanocomposites to non-cytotoxic degradation products

期刊

POLYMER DEGRADATION AND STABILITY
卷 95, 期 4, 页码 491-499

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2010.01.001

关键词

In vitro biodegradation; Polyurethane; Nanocomposite; Degradation products; Cytotoxicity

资金

  1. CAPES/MEC (Brazil)
  2. CNPq/MCT (Brazil)
  3. FAPEMIG

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polyurethanes with controllable biodegradable properties have been considered for biomedical applications. However, the potential toxicity of their biodegraded by-products is still a concern. In this study, biodegradable polyurethanes based on poly(F-caprolactone) (PCL) and/or poly(ethylene glycol) as soft segments and biodegradable polyurethanes containing montmorillonite nanoparticles were synthesized and were Subjected to in vitro biodegradation for 4 months. The post-degraded polyurethanes and nanocomposites were characterized by infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), X-ray diffraction (XRD) and small angle X-ray scattering (SAXS). The toxicity of the biodegradation by-products was evaluated by measuring their effect on the viability of retinal cells. FTIR results indicated that hard segments of the biomaterials were preserved during biodegradation, and Suggested that the ester bonds of the PCL incorporated into the soft segments were hydrolytic broken. XRD data indicated also that the soft segments crystallized as a result of the hydrolysis of PCL ester bonds and re-organization of the amorphous phase during annealing at 37 degrees C. As the biodegradation of the biomaterials induced the formation of soft segment lamella crystals, a complex nanostructure was formed, resulting in the enhancement of the small angle X-ray scattering. The by-products were non-cytotoxic to the retinal cells. These results Suggest that the hydrolytic unstable polyurethanes and nanocomposites can be possible candidates for ophthalmological applications. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. 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