4.7 Article

Fabrication of transparent hemispherical 3D nanofibrous scaffolds with radially aligned patterns via a novel electrospinning method

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-21618-0

关键词

-

资金

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) by Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [2016R1A2A2A07005160]
  2. program for fostering next-generation researchers in engineering of National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT [2017H1D8A2030449]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tissue engineering has significantly contributed to the development of optimal treatments for individual injury sites based on their unique functional and histologic properties. Human organs and tissue have three-dimensional (3D) morphologies; for example, the morphology of the eye is a spherical shape. However, most conventional electrospinning equipment is only capable of fabricating a two-dimensional (2D) structured fibrous scaffold and no report is available on a 3D electrospinning method to fabricate a hemispherical scaffold to mimic the native properties of the cornea, including microscopic to macroscopic morphology and transparency. We proposed a novel electrospinning method using a single nonconductive hemispherical device and a metal pin. A designed peg-top shaped collector, a hemispherical nonconductive device with a metal pin in the center and copper wire forming a circle around at the edge was attached to a conventional conductive collector. A 3D hemispherical transparent scaffold with radially aligned nanofibers was successfully fabricated with the designed peg-top collector. In summary, our fabricated 3D electrospun scaffold is expected to be suitable for the treatment of injuries of ocular tissues owing to the hemispherical shape and radially aligned nanofibers which can guide the direction of the main collagen and cellular actin filament in the extracellular matrix.

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