4.7 Article

Solid-State Crosslinkable, Shape-Memory Polyesters Serving Tissue Engineering

期刊

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/marc.202200955

关键词

additive manufacturing; digital light processing; polyesters; polyurethanes; shape-memory; two-photon polymerization

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Acrylate-endcapped urethane-based precursors were synthesized to form a poly(D,L-lactide)/poly(epsilon-caprolactone) (PDLLA/PCL) random copolymer backbone with different architectures and molar masses. By adjusting the monomer content, the glass transition temperature and actuation temperature of the polymers could be controlled. The resulting polymers showed excellent shape-memory properties and compatibility with additive manufacturing techniques. Moreover, they exhibited biocompatibility in in vitro cell assays.
Acrylate-endcapped urethane-based precursors constituting a poly(D,L-lactide)/poly(epsilon-caprolactone) (PDLLA/PCL) random copolymer backbone are synthesized with linear and star-shaped architectures and various molar masses. It is shown that the glass transition and thus the actuation temperature could be tuned by varying the monomer content (0-8 wt% epsilon-caprolactone, T-g,T-crosslinked = 10-42 degrees C) in the polymers. The resulting polymers are analyzed for their physico-chemical properties and viscoelastic behavior (G '(max) = 9.6-750 kPa). The obtained polymers are subsequently crosslinked and their shape-memory properties are found to be excellent (R-r = 88-100%, R-f = 78-99.5%). Moreover, their potential toward processing via various additive manufacturing techniques (digital light processing, two-photon polymerization and direct powder extrusion) is evidenced with retention of their shape-memory effect. Additionally, all polymers are found to be biocompatible in direct contact in vitro cell assays using primary human foreskin fibroblasts (HFFs) through MTS assay (up to approximate to 100% metabolic activity relative to TCP) and live/dead staining (>70% viability).

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