4.7 Article

Electrospun meshes of poly (n-butyl cyanoacrylate) and their potential applications for drug delivery and tissue engineering

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2021.120735

关键词

Electrospinning; Poly (n-butyl cyanoacrylate); 5-Fluorouracil; Human gingival fibroblasts

资金

  1. German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) [57314022]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aimed to develop novel PBCA nanofiber meshes for drug delivery and tissue engineering, showing that PBCA nanofibers produced through electrospinning exhibited good morphology and mechanical properties, making them suitable for drug delivery carriers and tissue engineering scaffolds.
The aim of the present work was to develop novel meshes of poly (n-butyl cyanoacrylate) (PBCA) nanofibers for potential applications in drug delivery and tissue engineering taking into account the successful application of PBCA in other medical uses. Electrospinning was applied to solutions of PBCA, 10(3) and 10(6) Da. 5-fluorouracil was chosen as model drug for the delivery study because of its effectiveness against cancer, while human gingival fibroblasts (HFIB-G) to confirm the biocompatibility of drug-free PBCA meshes and their potential for tissue engineering. PBCA was able to be electrospun in a wide range of molecular weights, producing fibers free of defects with diameters between 380 nm and 6 mu m. Meshes of PBCA (10(5)-10(6) Da) showed high flexibility with Young's modulus and maximal tension values in the range of 0.3-1.6 MPa and 0.03-0.13 MPa respectively. Results from the drug delivery study suggested that 5-fluorouracil was homogeneously loaded into PBCA meshes. Its release was extremely slow, initially 20% in 7 days and the rest gradually (until 96 days) in physiological medium at 37 degrees C. HFIB-G were well attached and proliferated over PBCA nanofibers during 23 days. Results suggested that PBCA meshes serve as excellent frameworks for cell adhesion/proliferation, and for drug delivery extended periods.

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