4.7 Article

A sandwich-like silk fibroin/polysaccharide composite dressing with continual biofluid draining for wound exudate management

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.127000

关键词

Unidirectional wicking; Photothermal effect; Wound healing

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents a sandwich-like fibers/sponge dressing with continuous exudate drainage for optimal wound healing. Animal experiments showed that the dressing had superior wound-healing characteristics and has the potential to become the next generation of clinical dressings.
Optimal wound healing requires a wet microenvironment without over-hydration. Inspired by capillarity and transpiration, we have developed a sandwich-like fibers/sponge dressing with continuous exudate drainage to maintain appropriate wound moisture. This dressing is prepared by integrating a three-layer structure using the freeze-drying method. Layer I, as the side that contacts with the skin directly, consists of a hydrophobic silk fibroin membrane; Layer II, providing the pumping action, is made of superabsorbent chitosan-konjac glucomannan sponge; Layer III, accelerating evaporation sixfold compared to natural evaporation, is constructed with a graphene oxide soaked hydrophilic cellulose acetate membrane. Animal experiments showed that the composite dressing had superior wound-healing characteristics, with wounds decreasing to 24.8% of their original size compared to 28.5% for the commercial dressing and 43.2% for the control. The enhanced wound healing can be ascribed to the hierarchical porous structure serves as the fluid-driving factor in this effort; the hydrophilicity of a membrane composed of silk fibroin nanofibers is adjustable to regulate fluid-transporting capacity; and the photothermal effect of graphene oxide guarantees exudates that have migrated to the top layer to evaporate continuously. These findings indicate the unidirectional wicking dressing has the potential to become the next generation of clinical dressings.

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