4.7 Article

Enhanced skin adhesive property of α-cyclodextrin/nonanyl group-modified poly(vinyl alcohol) inclusion complex film

期刊

CARBOHYDRATE POLYMERS
卷 263, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2021.117993

关键词

?-Cyclodextrin; Poly(vinyl alcohol); Hydrophobic modification; Inclusion complex; Adhesion; Water vapor transmission; Ion permeability

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) KAKENHI [20H02470]
  2. Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED) [20lm0203114h0001]
  3. Innovation Inspired by Nature Research Support Program, Sekisui Chemical Co. Ltd.
  4. Uehara Memorial Foundation
  5. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20H02470] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study successfully fabricated an inclusion complex film containing β-cyclodextrin and nonanyl group-modified PVA, showing good water vapor transmission rate and ion permeability, making it suitable for adhesive use in skin contact medical devices.
For skin contact medical devices, realizing a strong contact with skin is essential to precisely detect human biological information and enable human-machine interaction. In this study, we aimed to fabricate and characterize an inclusion complex film (ICF) for skin adhesion using ?-cyclodextrin (?-CD) and nonanyl groupmodified PVA (C9-PVA) under wet conditions. Based on the water insolubility of C9-PVA and the inclusion ability of ?-CD for alkyl groups, ?-CD/C9-PVA ICF was prepared. Among the prepared ICFs, ?-CD/2.5C9-PVA (w/ w = 0.5) ICF showed the highest bonding strength and T-peeling strength to porcine skin. Furthermore, ?-CD/ 2.5C9-PVA (w/w = 0.5) ICF had better water vapor transmission rate than that of commercial tapes. In addition, the ion permeability test revealed that ?-CD/2.5C9-PVA (w/w = 0.5) ICF exhibited excellent Na and Cl ion permeability. These results demonstrated that the multi-functional ?-CD/2.5C9-PVA (w/w = 0.5) ICF can be a promising adhesive for skin contact medical devices.

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