4.8 Article

Biodegradable injectable polyurethanes: Synthesis and evaluation for orthopaedic applications

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 29, 期 28, 页码 3762-3770

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.06.021

关键词

injectable polyurethanes; in vitro degradation; in vivo degradation; biocompatibility; mechanical properties; orthopaedic

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Biodegradable polyurethanes offer advantages in the design of injectable or preformed scaffolds for tissue engineering and other medical implant applications. We have developed two-part injectable prepolymer systems (prepolymer A and 13) consisting of lactic acid and glycolic acid based polyester star polyols, pentaerythritol (PE) and ethyl lysine diisocyanate (ELDI). This study reports on the formulation and properties of a series of cross linked polyurethanes specifically developed for orthopaedic applications. Prepolymer A was based on PE and ELDI. Polyester polyols (prepolymer B) were based on PE and DL-lactic acid (PEDLLA) or PE and glycolic acid (PEGA) with molecular weights 456 and 453, respectively. Several cross linked porous and non-porous polyurethanes were prepared by mixing and curing prepolymers A and B and their mechanical and thermal properties, in vitro (PBS/37 degrees C/pH 7.4) and in vivo (sheep bi-lateral) degradation evaluated. The effect of incorporating beta-tricalcium phosphate (beta-TCP, 5 microns, 10 wt.%) was also investigated. The cured polymers exhibited high compressive strength (100190 MPa) and modulus (1600-2300 MPa). beta-TCP improved mechanical properties in PEDLLA based polyurethanes and retarded the onset of in vitro and in vivo degradation. Sheep study results demonstrated that the polymers in both injectable and precured forms did not cause any surgical difficulties or any adverse tissue response. Evidence of new bone growth and the gradual degradation of the polymers were observed with increased implant time up to 6 months. (c) 2008 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