Effect of different exposure times on physicochemical, mechanical and biological properties of PGS scaffolds treated with plasma of iodine-doped polypyrrole

Abstract

Polyglycerol sebacate (PGS) scaffolds obtained using a leaching technique were modified with iodine-doped polypyrrole (PPy-I) in a plasma reactor in order to study the effect of exposure time on the cell viability of hDPSCs. SEM analysis showed the formation and growth of PPy-I particles as the exposure time was increased, while FTIR and XPS analysis revealed the presence of -NH- and N+ groups in the chemical composition of the surfaces, relating to the increase in the amount of PPY-I particles. The water contact angle measurements showed an increase in the scaffold’s hydrophilicity with greater exposure times which was also attributed to the rising of PPy-I particles. It was also observed that PPy-I promotes the rigidity of the treated PGS scaffolds. when in direct contact with treated PGS scaffolds, cell viability improved with respect to non-treated scaffolds, however only at shorter time exposures. Extracts of plasma-treated PGS scaffolds showed high cytotoxicity as the time exposure to plasma treatment was increased.

Pyrrole Plasma Polymer-Coated Electrospun Scaffolds for Neural Tissue Engineering

“…However, an apparent swelling was observed on the cell culture SEM images, suggesting an increment of pore space three dimensionally. Considering that PLA is hydrophobic [72,73], whereas pPPy and pPPy/I are hydrophilic [45,71], these results suggest that uncoated scaffolds maintained their pore size in culture and the cells occupied available pores, thus reflecting a decrement in pore size. On the other hand, an increment of pore size in coated scaffolds suggests a good interaction of the material within a biologic medium, which in culture absorbs water and swells producing an increase in porosity, allowing cells and nutrients to migrate throughout the porous structure.…”

“…Pore size significantly increased in rPLA+pPPy and aPLA+pPPy/I scaffolds in culture, suggesting that these scaffolds are expanding the porous space while interacting with cells and culture media. Since pPPy and pPPy/I surfaces are hydrophilic [45,71], scaffolds may be swelling from the media water uptake, explaining the increment in pore size in culture. However, aPLA+pPPy and rPLA+pPPy/I showed no significant differences between pore size as-fabricated and in culture, as cells proliferated mainly over the surface of the scaffolds in aPLA+pPPy scaffolds.…”

Poly(Glycerol Sebacate) in Biomedical Applications—A Review of the Recent Literature

“…In contrast to inorganic fillers, also synthetic (e.g., polylactic acid (PLA) [ 80 ] ) or natural (cellulose nanocrystals, [ 52 ] ureido‐pyrimidinone [ 57 ] ) polymers or metabolic compounds like tyramine [ 84 ] have been successfully blended with PGS to improve the mechanical, hydrophilic, and degradation properties. The addition of electrically conductive compounds like carbon nanotubes, [ 88 ] aniline pentamer, [ 81,85 ] graphene, [ 86 ] or plasma polymerization of polypyrrole [ 90 ] has been investigated to create highly tunable conductive films with enhanced cell survival and attachment [ 86 ] and enhanced Schwann cells (SCs) myelin gene expression. [ 81 ]…”

Different methods of synthesizing poly(glycerol sebacate) (PGS): A review

“…The major focus of PGS-inspired polymers is the development of scaffold material for biological tissue engineering (Wang et al, 2002;Gao et al, 2006;Gao et al, 2007;Jeong and Hollister, 2010;Kemppainen and Hollister, 2010;Masoumi et al, 2013;Khosravi et al, 2016;Ma et al, 2016;Zhang et al, 2016;Nadim et al, 2017;Hsu et al, 2018;Wu W et al, 2019;Hu et al, 2019;Jiang et al, 2019;Xiao et al, 2019;Abudula et al, 2020;Fu et al, 2020a;Apsite et al, 2020;Fu et al, 2020b;Sencadas et al, 2020b;Jafari et al, 2020;Keirouz et al, 2020;Liang et al, 2020;Martín-Pat et al, 2020;Pashneh-Tala et al, 2020;Xuan et al, 2020;Abazari et al, 2021;Behtaj et al, 2021a;Piszko et al, 2021a;Liu et al, 2021;Rastegar et al, 2021; Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology frontiersin.org Ângelo et al, 2021;Chen et al, 2022;Fukunishi et al, 2022;Saudi et al, 2022), although many other purposes have been identified for these materials. PGS-based materials have been investigated as drug delivery systems (Sun et al, 2009;Sun et al, 2013;Yang et al, 2017;Ayati Najafabadi et...…”

“…The major focus of PGS-inspired polymers is the development of scaffold material for biological tissue engineering ( Wang et al, 2002 ; Gao et al, 2006 ; Gao et al, 2007 ; Jeong and Hollister, 2010 ; Kemppainen and Hollister, 2010 ; Masoumi et al, 2013 ; Khosravi et al, 2016 ; Ma et al, 2016 ; Zhang et al, 2016 ; Nadim et al, 2017 ; Hsu et al, 2018 ; Wu W et al, 2019 ; Hu et al, 2019 ; Jiang et al, 2019 ; Xiao et al, 2019 ; Abudula et al, 2020 ; Fu et al, 2020a ; Apsite et al, 2020 ; Fu et al, 2020b ; Sencadas et al, 2020b ; Jafari et al, 2020 ; Keirouz et al, 2020 ; Liang et al, 2020 ; Martín-Pat et al, 2020 ; Pashneh-Tala et al, 2020 ; Xuan et al, 2020 ; Abazari et al, 2021 ; Behtaj et al, 2021a ; Piszko et al, 2021a ; Liu et al, 2021 ; Rastegar et al, 2021 ; Ângelo et al, 2021 ; Chen et al, 2022 ; Fukunishi et al, 2022 ; Saudi et al, 2022 ), although many other purposes have been identified for these materials. PGS-based materials have been investigated as drug delivery systems ( Sun et al, 2009 ; Sun et al, 2013 ; Yang et al, 2017 ; Ayati Najafabadi et al, 2018 ; Desai et al, 2018 ; Oklu et al, 2018 ; Zhu et al, 2018 ; Rezk et al, 2020 ; Zanjanizadeh Ezazi et al, 2020 ; Sivanesan et al, 2021 ; Torabi et al, 2021 ; Heydari et al, 2022 ; Mehta et al, 2022 ), adhesives ( Mahdavi et al, 2008 ; Tevlek et al, 2017 ; Azerêdo et al, 2022 ), sealants ( Chen et al, 2011 ), coatings ( Kim et al, 2014 ; Lin et al, 2015 ; Ji...…”