4.8 Article

PEO-PPO-PEO-based poly(ether ester urethane)s as degradable reverse thermo-responsive multiblock copolymers

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 27, 期 9, 页码 1718-1727

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.10.035

关键词

poly(ether ester urethane)s; PEO-PPO-PEO blocks copolymers; reverse thermo-responsive behavior; degradation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aiming at developing biodegradable thermo-responsive polymers that display enhanced rheological properties, a family of PEO-PPO PEO based poly(ether ester urethane)s, was developed. The materials were produced following a two-step synthetic pathway. The PEO-PPO-PEO triblocks were first end-capped with LA or CL oligo(ester)s whereby pentablocks were produced. Then, the different precursors were chain extended using hexamethylene diisocyanate to create the respective polymers. The length and type of the ester block influenced the behavior of the molecules in water, especially their viscosity versus temperature response. The gelation temperature increased from 23 degrees C for a 20 wt% F127 solution to 26 and 31 degrees C for pentablocks with 4.4 and 7.5 lactoyl units, respectively. Materials containing longer LA units failed to show any reverse thermo-responsiveness. The presence of the oligo(ester) blocks also reduced the viscosity of the gel at 37 degrees C. While F127 displayed a viscosity of around 28,000 Pa s, pentablocks containing 4.4 and 7.5 LA units showed values of 15,400 and 12,600 Pas. Also, the viscosity at 37 degrees C as well as the gelation temperature decreased as the molecular weight of the oligo(ester)s increased. Finally, the degradation process of the gels was studied by monitoring their viscosity at body temperature and determining the molecular weight of the polymers, over time. Polymers were tailored so to combine high initial viscosity values with diverse degradation rates, as a function of the length and type of the oligo(ester) present along the polymeric backbone. (C) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.8
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