4.6 Article

High internal phase emulsions stabilised by supramolecular cellulose nanocrystals and their application as cell-adhesive macroporous hydrogel monoliths

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY B
卷 5, 期 14, 页码 2671-2678

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c7tb00145b

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21604025, 51232002, 51273072]
  2. Guangdong Natural Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars [2016A030306018]
  3. Guangdong Natural Science Foundation [2014B090907004, 2016A030310461]
  4. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2016M592486]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nanosized celluloses are attractive building blocks to generate hierarchically advanced materials and have been gradually explored in emulsion applications. Here we report a high internal phase emulsion (HIPE) prepared by using supramolecular cellulose nanocrystals (CNCs) as Pickering stabilisers via one-step emulsification, and interconnected macroporous hybrid hydrogels were produced by utilizing this HIPE as a template. A quadruple hydrogen bonding moiety 2-ureido-4[1H]-pyrimidone (UPy) was firstly grafted onto the surface of cellulose nanocrystals through simple free radical polymerization. The polymer grafting was confirmed by elemental analysis and thermogravimetry. The UPy modified CNCs (CNC-UPy) exhibited superior emulsion stabilising ability compared to the pristine CNCs, and the oil-in-water emulsions with an internal phase volume ratio of 80% showed good long-term stability. The properties of resulting macroporous polyHIPE hydrogels, such as swelling behaviours, porous structures and mechanical strength, were investigated on the dependence of CNC-UPy concentrations. In addition, the macroporous hybrid hydrogel exhibits excellent cytocompatibility and cell adhesion as demonstrated by mouse bone mesenchymal stem cell (mBMSC) culture. With these promising properties, the developed hydrogels demonstrate great potential as active biological scaffolds for tissue engineering.

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

4.6
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