Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T12:55:23.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Biohybrid Fibro-Porous Vascular Scaffolds: Effect of Crosslinking on Properties

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 May 2015

Vinoy Thomas ,
Danna Nozik ,
Harsh Patel ,
Raj K. Singh  and
Yogesh K. Vohra
Vinoy Thomas*
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science & Engineering, University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), BEC 254, 1720 2nd Avenue South, Birmingham, AL 35294, U.S.A. UAB Center for Nanoscale Materials and Biointegration, Birmingham, AL 35294, U.S.A.
Danna Nozik
Affiliation:
Brown University, Providence, RI 02912, U.S.A.
Harsh Patel
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science & Engineering, University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), BEC 254, 1720 2nd Avenue South, Birmingham, AL 35294, U.S.A.
Raj K. Singh
Affiliation:
Vivo Bioscience, Inc. Birmingham, AL 35205, U.S.A.
Yogesh K. Vohra
Affiliation:
UAB Center for Nanoscale Materials and Biointegration, Birmingham, AL 35294, U.S.A.
*
*vthomas@uab.edu
Get access

Abstract

Tubular grafts were fabricated from blends of polycaprolactone (PCL) and poly(glycolide-co-caprolactone) (PGC) polymers and coated with an extracellular matrix containing collagens, laminin, and proteoglycans, but not growth factors (HuBiogel™). Multifunctional scaffolds from polymer blends and membrane proteins provide the necessary biomechanics and biological functions for tissue regeneration. Two crosslinking agents, a natural crosslinker namely genipin (Gp) and a carbodiimide reagent namely 1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)carbodiimide (EDC), were used for further stabilizing the protein matrix and the effect of crosslinking was evaluated for structural, morphological, mechanical properties using SEM, DSC and DMA. SEM images and fiber diameter distribution showed fiber-size between 0.2 μm to 1 μm with the majority of fiber diameters being under 500 nm, indicating upper range of protein fiber-sizes (for example, collagen fibers in extracellular matrix are in 50 to 500 nm diameter range). HB coating did not affect the mechanical properties, but increased its hydrophilicity of the graft. Overall data showed that PCL/PGC blends with 3:1 mass ratio exhibited mechanical properties comparable to those of human native arteries (tensile strength of 1-2 MPa and Young’s modulus of <10 MPa). Additionally, the effect of crosslinking on coating stability was investigated to assure the retention of proteins on scaffold for effective cell-matrix interactions.

Keywords

biomaterialpolymerfiber
Type
Articles
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1718: Symposium B – Multifunctional Polymeric and Hybrid Materials , 2015 , pp. 79 - 84
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Wang, X., Lin, P., Yao, Q., and Chen, C., World J. Surg. 31, 682 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salacinski, H. J., Goldner, S., Giudiceandrea, A., Hamilton, G., Seifalian, A. M., Edwards, A., and Carson, R. J., J. Biomater. Appl. 15, 241 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pham, Q. P., Sharma, U., and Mikos, A. G., Tissue Eng. 12, 1197 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, X., Thomas, V., Xu, Y., Bellis, S. L., and Vohra, Y. K., Biomaterials 31, 4376 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patel, H. N., Garcia, R., Schindler, C., Dean, D. R., Pogwizd, S. M., Singh, R., Vohra, Y. K., and Thomas, V., Polym Int. 64, 547 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, X., Thomas, V., and Vohra, Y. K., J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 21, 541 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, R., Collingsworth, P., Alapati, V., Chen, X., and Siegal, G. P., In Vitro Develop. Biol. 38, 11 (2002).Google Scholar
Barnes, C. P., Pemble, C. W., Brand, D. D., Simpson, D. G., and Bowlin, G. L., Tissue Eng. 13, 1593 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frohbergh, M. E., Katsman, A., Botta, G. P., Lazarovici, P., Schauer, C. L., Wegst, U. G., and Lelkes, P. I., Biomaterials 33, 9167 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, K., Qian, Y., Wang, H., Fan, L., Huang, C., Yin, A., and Mo, X., J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A, 95, 870 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bottino, M. C., Thomas, V., Jose, M. V., Dean, D. R., and Janowski, G. M. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. B Appl. Biomater. 95, 276 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gee, A. O., Baker, B. M., Silverstein, A. M., Montero, G., Esterhai, J. L., and Mauck, R. L., Cell Tissue Res. 347, 803 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar