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
. 2024 Sep 20;14(41):30055-30069.
doi: 10.1039/d4ra04546g. eCollection 2024 Sep 18.

MOF@platelet-rich plasma antimicrobial GelMA dressing: structural characterization, bio-compatibility, and effect on wound healing efficacy

Pengyu Huang  1   2 , Yongan He  3 , Chunnuan Huang  1 , Shuhan Jiang  1 , Ji Gan  1 , Rong Wu  1 , Chengjiao Ai  1 , Jiean Huang  1 , Chaoguang Yao  4 , Quanzhi Chen  1
Affiliations

MOF@platelet-rich plasma antimicrobial GelMA dressing: structural characterization, bio-compatibility, and effect on wound healing efficacy

Pengyu Huang et al. RSC Adv. .

Abstract

In this study, a metal-organic framework (MOF) antimicrobial gel loaded with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) was prepared to improve the biological properties of gelatin gels and enhance their wound healing efficiency. PRP, MOF particles, and PRP-loaded MOF particles were each integrated into gelatin gels. The performance of the gels was evaluated for micro-structure, mechanical strength, in vitro bio-compatibility and pro-wound healing effects. The results revealed that the integration of PRP created a multi-cross-linked structure, increasing the ductility of the gels by over 40%. The addition of MOF particles significantly increased the strength of the gel from 13 kPa to 43 kPa. The combination of MOF and PRP further improved the cell induction and migration capabilities of the composite gel, and the scratches in the PRP/MOF@GelMA group had completely healed within 48 h. Due to the presence of MOF and PRP, the gel dressing exhibited inhibitory effects of 45.7% against Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) and 50.2% against Escherichia coli (E. coli). Different gels promoted tissue regeneration and wound healing ability of bacterial-infected wounds in C57 rats, while PRP/MOF@GelMA showed the strongest wound repair ability with 100% healing. This study provides a new strategy for the development and clinical application of gel dressings.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Study scenario diagram.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2. Macroscopic view of the different gels (a), SEM morphology of MOF particles (b), SEM morphology of gels with different compositions ((c) GelMA, (d) MOF@GelMA, (e) PRP@GelMA, (f) PRP/MOF@PRP), crosslinking time of different gels (g), FT-IR spectra of different gels (h), compression strength analysis (i), quantitative analysis results for (i) and (j), tensile deformation (k).
Fig. 3
Fig. 3. Degradation (a) and the swelling rate (b) of different gels in PBS with at 37 °C, pH = 7.4.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4. Antibacterial analysis of different gels for (a) S. aureus, (b) E. coli, (c) Zn2+ release curve (*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01).
Fig. 5
Fig. 5. Live/dead staining analysis for different cells ((a) GelMA, (b) MOF@GelMA, (c) PRP@GelMA, (d) PRP/MOF@GelMA), fluorescent staining of cells with different gels ((e) GelMA, (f) MOF@GelMA, (g) PRP@GelMA, (h) PRP/MOF@GelMA), effect of gels on cellular vascularization ((i) GelMA, (j) MOF@GelMA, (k) PRP@GelMA, (l) PRP/MOF@GelMA), apoptosis evaluation of the cells grown on the gels ((m) GelMA, (n) MOF@GelMA, (o) PRP@GelMA, (p) PRP/MOF@GelMA), cytotoxicityand proliferation analysis of different gels (q), apoptosis evaluation of the cells grown on different gels (r) (*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01).
Fig. 6
Fig. 6. In vitro wound healing assay of the HUVECs ((a), scale bar = 200 μm), quantitative analysis of the rate of wound closure at 48 h in the different gels (b), analysis of blood compatibility (c) and hemolysis rate of different gels (d) (***P < 0.001).
Fig. 7
Fig. 7. (a) Wound photos of control group, GelMA, MOF@GelMA, PRP@GelMA, PRP/MOF@GelMA at 0, 1, 3, 5, 7, 10 and 14 days. (b) Wound area statistics of each group, *: compared with the control group (*P < 0.05).
Fig. 8
Fig. 8. HE and Masson staining of regenerative skin tissues on 7 days (a), HE and Masson staining of regenerative skin tissues on 14 days (a) and (b).
Fig. 9
Fig. 9. Relative expression analysis of IL-6 mRNA (a), VEGF mRNA (b), and PDGF mRNA (c) in the 7th day of wound recovery (*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Sorg H. Tilkorn D. J. Hager S. Hauser J. Mirastschijski U. Skin Wound Healing: An Update on the Current Knowledge and Concepts. Eur. Surg. Res. 2017;58(1–2):81–94. doi: 10.1159/000454919. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Qi L. Zhang C. Wang B. Yin J. Yan S. Progress in Hydrogels for Skin Wound Repair. Macromol. Biosci. 2022;22(7):e2100475. doi: 10.1002/mabi.202100475. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cheng Y. Chang Y. Feng Y. et al., Hierarchical Acceleration of Wound Healing through Intelligent Nanosystem to Promote Multiple Stages. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 2019;11(37):33725–33733. doi: 10.1021/acsami.9b13267. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Negut I. Grumezescu V. Grumezescu A. M. Treatment Strategies for Infected Wounds. Molecules. 2018;23(9):2392. doi: 10.3390/molecules23092392. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kim H. S. Sun X. Lee J. H. Kim H. W. Fu X. Leong K. W. Advanced drug delivery systems and artificial skin grafts for skin wound healing. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2019;146:209–239. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2018.12.014. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources