Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:12:55.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Soluble poly(glycerol sebacate) and poly(ε-caprolactone) 3D scaffolds for blood vessel constructs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2016

Ricardo Vera Graziano
Affiliation:
Instituto de Investigaciones en Materiales, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán 04510 México, D.F., Apdo. Postal 70-360, México
Andromeda A.L. Monroy Brera
Affiliation:
Instituto de Investigaciones en Materiales, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán 04510 México, D.F., Apdo. Postal 70-360, México
Raúl Montiel Campos
Affiliation:
División de Ciencias Básicas e Ingeniería, 186, Leyes de Reforma 1ra Secc, 49346 D.F., Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, Unidad Iztapalapa, México, D.F.
Alfredo Maciel Cerda
Affiliation:
Instituto de Investigaciones en Materiales, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán 04510 México, D.F., Apdo. Postal 70-360, México
Get access

Abstract

Cardiovascular diseases, frequently associated to the formation of aneurisms, are the mayor cause of mortality and morbidity in the world. Due to the increased need for the regeneration of arteries and veins, several natural and synthetic biopolymers such as poly(glycerol sebacate), PGS, have been studied to make blood vessel constructs. PGS elastomeric properties develop after it is crosslinked; however, the poor solubility of the material limits the process to fabricate useful constructs for tissue engineering by electrospinning, casting, or other methods. The structure and properties of electrospun scaffolds made from soluble poly(glycerol sebacate) and poly(ε- caprolactone), are reported here. Soluble PGS oligomers (o-PGS) of different molecular weight, obtained by the polycondensation reaction of sebacic acid and glycerol, were analyzed, including molecular structure, physical properties and solubility. Temperature, reactor atmosphere, and time of reaction strongly influenced the solubility, the molecular weight and molecular structure. To improve o-PGS processing and properties it was mixed with PCL to make electrospun scaffolds. In order to process the mixture by electrospinning, homogeneous solutions o-PGS and PCL were prepared. Because PCL is hydrophobic and o-PGS is hydrophilic selected solvent mixtures were tested to form the homogeneous solutions; the materials dissolved in a mixture of THF:DMF:DCM. Typical electrospinning parameters for preparing the tubular scaffolds at room conditions were: voltage 17.5 kV, needle-collector distance 20 cm and, relative humidity 30-35%, flow injection 0.5 to 2.0 ml/h. The initial mechanical properties of the biodegradable scaffolds were better than those made of natural grafts; the Young’s modulus ranged from 7.6 to 13.0 MPa, depending on electrospinning process parameters. The morphology and physical properties of electrospun PGS/PCL tubular scaffolds show useful features not found in similar constructs made by other methods. The 3D tubular scaffolds were built-up of layered porous walls to produce constructs of different pore size and fibers of different diameter. The porous area was one to two orders of magnitude higher than those produced at micrometer scale by conventional melting and dry/wet spinning methods. These scaffolds show useful characteristics for regenerative medicine such as physical properties; nanometric diameters; high surface/volume ratio; and potentiallity for adhesion and growth of living cells.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2016 

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

Koullias, G., Modak y, R. Tranquilli, M., Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 130, 677 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y. D., Ameer, G. A., Sheppard, F. J., Nat. Biotechnol. 20(6), 602 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sant, S., Iyer, D., Akhilesh, , Gaharwar, K., Patel, A., Khademhusseini, A., Acta Biomaterialia 9, 5963 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gómez-Pachón, E. Y., Sánchez-Arévalo, F. M., Sabina, F., Maciel-Cerda, A., Montiel Campos, R., Batina, N., Morales-Reyes, I., Vera-Graziano, R., Journal of Materials Science 48, 8308 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sant, S., Khademhosseini, A., Conf. Proc. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 1, 3546 (2010).Google Scholar
Palce, E. S., Gerge, J. H., Williams, C. K. and Stevens, M. M.. Synthetic polymer scaffolds for tissue engineering, Critical Review, DOI:10.1039/b811392k (2009).Google Scholar
Chen, Q.-Z., Bismarck, A., Hansen, U., Junaid, S., Harding, M. Q., Ali, N. N., Boccaccini, A. R., Biomaterials 29, 47 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vallabhaneni, S. R., Gilling-Smith, G. L., How, T. V., Carter, S. D., Brennan, J. A., and Harris, P. L., J. Endovasc. Ther. 11, 494 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar