Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Oct 31;2(10):6321-6328.
doi: 10.1021/acsomega.7b00460. Epub 2017 Oct 2.

Biodegradable and Bioactive PCL-PGS Core-Shell Fibers for Tissue Engineering

Lijuan Hou  1   2 , Xing Zhang  2 , Paiyz E Mikael  2 , Lei Lin  2 , Wenjun Dong  1   3 , Yingying Zheng  1 , Trevor John Simmons  2   2 , Fuming Zhang  2 , Robert J Linhardt  2
Affiliations

Biodegradable and Bioactive PCL-PGS Core-Shell Fibers for Tissue Engineering

Lijuan Hou et al. ACS Omega. .

Abstract

Poly(glycerol sebacate) (PGS) has increasingly become a desirable biomaterial due to its elastic mechanical properties, biodegradability, and biocompatibility. Here, we report microfibrous core-shell mats of polycaprolactone (PCL)-PGS prepared using wet-wet coaxial electrospinning. The anticoagulant heparin was immobilized onto the surface of these electrospun fiber mats, and they were evaluated for their chemical, mechanical, and biological properties. The core-shell structure of PCL-PGS provided tunable degradation and mechanical properties. The slowly degrading PCL provided structural integrity, and the fast degrading PGS component increased fiber elasticity. Young's modulus of PCL-PGS ranged from 5.6 to 15.7 MPa. The ultimate tensile stress ranged from 2.0 to 2.9 MPa, and these fibers showed elongation from 290 to 900%. The addition of PGS and grafting of heparin improved the attachment and proliferation of human umbilical vein endothelial cells. Core-shell PCL-PGS fibers demonstrate improved performance as three-dimensional fibrous mats for potential tissue-engineering applications.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Drawing of types of electrospun fibers prepared for the study. NX 10 (version 10, Siemens PLM) was used. (a) Unmodified mono and coaxial PCL–PGS fibers. (b) Aminolyzed mono and coaxial PCL–PGS fibers. (c) Heparin-immobilized mono and coaxial PCL–PGS fibers.
Figure 2
Figure 2
SEM images of mixture fibers 13PCL, 13PCL–m-40PGS, 13PCL–m-60PGS, and 13PCL–m-80PGS and core–shell fibers 13PCL–0PGS, 13PCL–40PGS, 13PCL–60PGS, and 13PCL–80PGS at 50 and 4 μm. SEM images of cross section for 13PCL–80PGS and 13PCL–m-80PGS at 5 μm.
Figure 3
Figure 3
(a) Effect of the PCL–PGS ratio on fiber diameter. *Significance (p < 0.05) is based on comparison against 13PCL fiber diameter, and error bars represent the standard deviation. (b) DSC analysis of the sixth cycle of mixture fibers and core–shell fibers. (c) X-ray diffraction spectra for the mixture fibers and core–shell fibers. ((a) PGS, (b) 13PCL, (c) 13PCL–m-40PGS, (d) 13PCL–m-60PGS, (e) 13PCL–m-80PGS, (f) 13PCL–0PGS, (g) 13PCL–40PGS, (h) 13PCL–60PGS, and (i) 13PCL–80PGS).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Mechanical properties of PCL–PGS fibers. (a) Stress–strain curves for the fibers. (b) Young’s modulus, as calculated from the 0–15% linear region of the stress–strain curves. (c) Ultimate tensile stress. (d) Elongation at break. *Significance (p < 0.05) is based on comparison against 13PCL fiber, and error bars represent the standard deviation. ((a) 13PCL–m-80PGS, (b) 13PCL–m-60PGS, (c) 13PCL–m-40PGS, (d) 13PCL, (e) 13PCL–0PGS, (f) 13PCL–40PGS, (g) 13PCL–60PGS, and (h) 13PCL–80PGS).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Accelerated in vitro degradation (mass loss, %) of (a) 13PCL–m-80PGS, (b) 13PCL–80PGS, and (c) 13PCL in 1 mM NaOH. Error bars represent the standard deviation.
Figure 6
Figure 6
HUVEC proliferation on 13PCL, 13PCL–hep, 13PCL–m-80PGS, 13PCL–m-80PGS–hep, 13PCL–80PGS, and 13PCL–80PGS–hep by the WST-1 assay. *Significance (p < 0.05) is based on comparison against 13PCL fibers, and error bars represent the standard deviation.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Langer R.; Vacanti J. P. Tissue Engineering. Science 1993, 260, 920–926. - PubMed
    1. Nair L. S.; Laurencin C. T.. Polymers as Biomaterials for Tissue Engineering and Controlled Drug Delivery. In Tissue Engineering I; Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology, 2006; Vol. 102, pp 47–90. - PubMed
    1. Karande T.; Kaufmann J. J. M.; Agrawal C.. Function and Requirement of Synthetic Scaffolds in Tissue Engineering, 2nd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, 2008.
    1. Igwe J.; Amini A.; Mikael P.; Laurencin C.; Nukavarapu S.. Nanostructured Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering. In Active Implants and Scaffolds for Tissue Regeneration; Zilberman M., Ed.; Springer, 2011; Vol. 8, pp 169–192.
    1. Viswanathan G.; Murugesan S.; Pushparaj V.; Nalamasu O.; Ajayan P. M.; Linhardt R. J. Preparation of biopolymer fibers by electrospinning from room temperature ionic liquids. Biomacromolecules 2006, 7, 415–418. 10.1021/bm050837s. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources