4.7 Article

Controlling the switching temperature of biodegradable shape memory polymers composed of stereocomplex polylactide / poly (D,L-lactide-co-ε-caprolactone) blends

期刊

POLYMER
卷 233, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.polymer.2021.124190

关键词

Shape memory; Polylactide; Poly(epsilon-caprolactone); Copolymers; Shape recovery temperature; Biodegradability; Glass transition temperature

资金

  1. Nissin Sugar Manufacturing Scholarship Foundation
  2. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS: KAKENHI) [19H00831, 19K22067, 20K15052]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [19K22067, 20K15052] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

New biodegradable shape-memory polymers (SMPs) were synthesized by blending PLCL and sc-PLA, showing controllable switching temperatures and shape-recovery ratios. The SMPs can be used as biomaterials for medical devices.
We synthesized new biodegradable shape-memory polymers (SMPs) by blending synthesized poly(D,L-lactide-co- epsilon-caprolactone) (PLCL) and stereocomplex polylactide (sc-PLA) to be used as biomaterials for medical devices. PLCL copolymers (Mn-80,000) with various monomer ratios (LA:CL) were synthesized by the bulk ring-opening polymerization. The glass transition temperature of the resulting PLCL copolymers could be well controlled from-3 degrees C to 60 degrees C, agreeing well with the values by the Gordon-Taylor equation, confirming the homogeneous random distribution of LA and CL monomers in the synthesized PLCL. The synthesized PLCL and sc-PLA were eventually blended for the fabrication of biodegradable SMPS. The PLCL/sc-PLA blend samples possessed the scPLA crystallinity of-13%, which effectively worked as crosslinkings, exhibiting shape-memory behavior with various switching temperatures (30.5 degrees C-62 degrees C) and shape-recovery ratios realized by adjusting the CL ratio of the PLCL copolymers: a lower CL ratio resulted in a higher switching temperature and a higher shape-recovery ratio.

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