4.7 Article

Alginate sulfate-based hydrogel/nanofiber composite scaffold with controlled Kartogenin delivery for tissue engineering

期刊

CARBOHYDRATE POLYMERS
卷 266, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2021.118123

关键词

Alginate sulfate; Hydrogel; fiber; Kartogenin; Drug delivery; Tissue engineering

资金

  1. ENT and Head & Neck Research Center
  2. Five Senses Health Institute in Hazrat Rasoul Akram Hospital
  3. Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, two different arrangements of laminated composite scaffolds were fabricated based on Alginate, showcasing improved mechanical features and sustained drug release. The optimized scaffold displayed advantages such as interconnected pores, controlled biodegradability, and no cytotoxic effect, making it a promising candidate for tissue regeneration.
In this study, we fabricated two different arrangements of laminated composite scaffolds based on Alginate: Alginate sulfate hydrogel, PCL:Gelatin electrospun mat, and Kartogenin-PLGA nanoparticles (KGN-NPs). The optimized composite scaffold revealed a range of advantages such as improved mechanical features as well as less potential of damage (less dissipated energy), interconnected pores of hydrogel and fiber with adequate pore size, excellent swelling ratio, and controlled biodegradability. Furthermore, the synthesized KGN-NPs with spherical morphology were incorporated into the composite scaffold and exhibited a linear and sustained release of KGN within 30 days with desirable initial burst reduction (12% vs. 20%). Additionally, the cytotoxicity impact of the composite was evaluated. Resazurin assay and Live/Dead staining revealed that the optimized composite scaffold has no cytotoxic effect and could improve cell growth. Overall, according to the enhanced mechanical features, suitable environment for cellular growth, and sustained drug release, the optimized scaffold would be a good candidate for tissue regeneration.

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