Effect of molecular weight and content of polyvinylpyrrolidone on cell proliferation, loading capacity and properties of electrospun green tea essential oil-incorporated polyamide-6/polyvinylpyrrolidone nanofibers

Recent progress of electrospun nanofibers as burning dressings

“… 158,159 Khataei et al reported a composite nanofiber wound dressing using polyamide-6, PVP, and tea tree essential oil produced by electrospinning. 132 The results of mechanical property tests showed that PVP improved the mechanical strength of the nanofibers, thus protecting the wound from external forces during the healing process. As the molecular weight of PVP increased, the nanofibers exhibited higher porosity, water vapor permeability, and surface wettability, thereby promoting cell adhesion and proliferation.…”

Measuring Physical Properties of Electrospun Nanofiber Mats for Different Biomedical Applications

“…Nevertheless, this relatively simple method can be used to give an estimate of the porosity, keeping in mind that irregularities of the sample thickness and its compressibility will potentially cause deviations from the real value. Porosity calculations by the apparent density, calculated from the sample volume, were reported by several research groups for different nanofiber mat materials, such as polyamide-6/polyvinylpyrrolidone [ 48 ], polyurethane [ 49 ] or collagen-coated poly(l-lactic acid)- co -poly( ε -caprolactone) [ 50 ].…”

“…The diameters of nanofibers in an electrospun membrane are usually obtained from SEM images and either given as average with standard deviation or as distribution, sometimes as distribution boxplots [ 101 ], but mostly as a histogram. In the latter case, typically 100 or more fiber diameters per sample are measured to prepare a histogram [ 39 , 41 , 48 , 49 , 90 ], as shown in Figure 4 [ 53 ]. In most cases, the diameters are measured manually by ImageJ [ 14 , 43 , 56 , 57 , 68 ], while a few groups mention other software [ 41 , 44 , 90 ] or do not mention the software used [ 70 ].…”

“…The hydrophobic or hydrophilic properties of nanofiber mats are mostly determined by contact angle measurements, mostly applying the sessile-drop method in which a small droplet (e.g., with 5 µL volume [ 49 , 133 ], sometimes less [ 43 ]) is placed on the sample, and a microscope with camera is used to take photographs from the side, often at defined times, enabling fitting the contact angles on the photographs. There are also contact measurement instruments that are commercially available [ 38 , 42 , 44 , 46 , 48 , 108 , 134 ]. For custom-made setups, evaluation of the contact angles is possible with ImageJ, either manually or with a plugin such as DropSnake [ 57 ].…”

“…Samadian et al reported a similar value for cellulose acetate/gelatin nanofibers [ 156 ], as did Zheng et al for crosslinked pectin nanofiber mats [ 157 ]. Slightly higher values of around 3500 g/(m 2 day) were found for polyamide-6/polyvinylpyrrolidone nanofibers [ 48 ], while Esmaeili reported smaller values of around 1300 g/(m 2 day) [ 44 ]. Salemi et al used a test temperature of only 33 °C, resulting in lower reference values of around 7440 g/(m 2 day) and around 3600 g/(m 2 day) for their poly (caprolactone)/poly (vinyl alcohol)/collagen nanofiber mats [ 158 ].…”