4.8 Article

Protein release from physically crosslinked hydrogels of the PLA/PEO/PLA triblock copolymer-type

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 22, 期 4, 页码 363-369

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00192-7

关键词

bioresorbable; poly(lactic acid); poly (ethylene glycol); triblock copolymer; hydrogel; drug release; bovine serum albumine; fibrinogen

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A series of PLA/PEO/PLA triblock copolymers was prepared by ring opening polymerization of rac-lactide in the presence of various di-hydroxyl poly (ethylene glycol)s, using Call, as a biocompatible initiator. Hydrogels were prepared by a phase separation method consisting of introducing small amounts of water over solutions of the copolymers in a biocompatible organic solvent, namely tetraglycol (poly (ethylene glycol monotetrahydrofurfuryl ether)). The resulting hydrogels appeared much more hydrophilic than the rather tough hydrogels formed by swelling of dry tablets or films processed from the same copolymers. The phase separation-derived hydrogels were soft enough to be injected through a trochar. Two proteins, namely bovine serum albumine (BSA) and fibrinogen, were physically entrapped in these hydrogels by mixing with the polymer solutions before gel formation. This procedure appeared to be protein-respecting according to circular dichroism analysis on the released BSA. Dramatically different release profiles were obtained for the two proteins. In the case of BSA, the release depended on the quantity of protein incorporated in the hydrogel and presented a parabolic-type profile, in agreement with the behaviors of diffusion-controlled monolitic drug delivery devices. In contrast, almost linear release profiles were observed in the case of fibrinogen, the hydrogels behaving like a reservoir drug delivery system. These findings are tentatively interpreted in terms of gel-protein compatibility in the case of BSA and gel-protein incompatibility in the case of fibrinogen. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science 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