4.7 Review

Cationic Polymers with Tailored Structures for Rendering Polysaccharide-Based Materials Antimicrobial: An Overview

期刊

POLYMERS
卷 11, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/polym11081283

关键词

polysaccharide; antimicrobial; guanidine-based polymer; gemini; antimold

资金

  1. NSERC Canada
  2. NSERC Strategic Network: Sentinel-Bioactive Paper
  3. NFS China [21466005, 21306027]
  4. Dean Project of Guangxi Key Laboratory of Petrochemical Resource Processing and Process Intensification Technology [2018k001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Antimicrobial polymers have attracted substantial interest due to high demands on improving the health of human beings via reducing the infection caused by various bacteria. The review presented herein focuses on rendering polysaccharides, mainly cellulosic-based materials and starch to some extent, antimicrobial via incorporating cationic polymers, guanidine-based types in particular. Extensive review on synthetic antimicrobial materials or plastic/textile has been given in the past. However, few review reports have been presented on antimicrobial polysaccharide, cellulosic-based materials, or paper packaging, especially. The current review fills the gap between synthetic materials and natural polysaccharides (cellulose, starch, and cyclodextrin) as substrates or functional additives for different applications. Among various antimicrobial polymers, particular attention in this review is paid to guanidine-based polymers and their derivatives, including copolymers, star polymer, and nanoparticles with core-shell structures. The review has also been extended to gemini surfactants and polymers. Cationic polymers with tailored structures can be incorporated into various products via surface grafting, wet-end addition, blending, or reactive extrusion, effectively addressing the dilemma of improving substrate properties and bacterial growth. Moreover, the pre-commercial trial conducted successfully for making antimicrobial paper packaging has also been addressed.

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