Length‐Scale Mediated Differential Adhesion of Mammalian Cells and Microbes

Wang, Yi; Subbiahdoss, Guruprakash; Swartjes, Jan J. T. M.; Mei, Henny C. van der; Busscher, Henk J.; Libera, Matthew

doi:10.1002/adfm.201100659

Cited by 70 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…) of PEG thin films lead to the formation of features patterned on the underlying silicon substrate. We have previously shown that these features swell when immersed in water in a dose‐dependent manner and thus correspond to microscopic hydrogels (microgels). Immunofluorescence imaging (see below and elsewhere demonstrates that these features resist protein adsorption consistent with hydrated PEG gels and brushes.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Poly(ethylene glycol) as a biointeractive electron‐beam resist

Wang

Firlar

Dai

et al. 2013

J Polym Sci B Polym Phys

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) can serve as an electron‐beam (e‐beam) resist to modulate protein adsorption on and cell adhesion to surfaces. PEG preferentially crosslinks under e‐beam irradiation to create microgels with controllable properties. Here, atomic‐force, scanning electron, and confocal microscopies are used to study discrete microgels formed from solvent‐cast PEG thin films by focused e‐beams with energies between 2 and 30 keV and point doses between 10 and 1000 fC. Consistent with experimental findings, Monte Carlo simulation of electron energy deposition identifies three structures within each microgel: a highly crosslinked core near the point of electron incidence; a lightly crosslinked near corona surrounding the core; and a far corona at the PEG–Si interface. The nature and relative sizes of these three regions and, hence, the microgel–protein interactions depend on the incident electron energy and dose. The far corona creates protein‐repulsive surface hundreds of nanometers or more from the microgel core. The highly crosslinked core is largely shielded by the near corona. These findings can help guide the choice of irradiation conditions to most effectively modulate protein–surface interactions via PEG microgels patterned by e‐beam lithography. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Polym. Sci., Part B: Polym. Phys. 2013, 51, 1543–1554

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Poly(ethylene glycol) as a biointeractive electron‐beam resist

Wang

Firlar

Dai

et al. 2013

J Polym Sci B Polym Phys

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tibial nail 1-7 ( 8) microbial colonization. Notably, surface modification remains the most frequently adopted route to reduce the incidence of biomaterial-associated infection (28)(29)(30). Unfortunately, performance demands and expectations imposed on many coatings by clinicians and patients to address infection risks are ill-defined.…”

Section: Protecting the Primary Implant Patientmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomaterial-Associated Infection: Locating the Finish Line in the Race for the Surface

et al. 2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biomaterial-associated infections occur on both permanent implants and temporary devices for restoration or support of human functions. Despite increasing use of biomaterials in an aging society, comparatively few biomaterials have been designed that effectively reduce the incidence of biomaterial-associated infections. This review provides design guidelines for infection-reducing strategies based on the concept that the fate of biomaterial implants or devices is a competition between host tissue cell integration and bacterial colonization at their surfaces.

show abstract

“…Nanotechnology also offers some promise with regard to minimizing the burden of implant‐associated infections, as reviewed by Montanaro [53]. Techniques such as micropatterning of antifouling surfaces have shown that bacterial‐repellent and tissue‐friendly surfaces may be achieved [54]. Similarly, nanoparticles other than silver have also been investigated for antibacterial efficacy.…”

Section: Designing Surfaces To Combat Infectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of material on the development of device-associated infections

Rochford

Richards

Moriarty

2012

Clinical Microbiology and Infection

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of implanted devices in modern orthopaedic surgery has greatly improved the quality of life for an increasing number of patients, by facilitating the rapid and effective healing of bone after traumatic fractures, and restoring mobility after joint replacement. However, the presence of an implanted device results in an increased susceptibility to infection for the patient, owing to the creation of an immunologically compromised zone adjacent to the implant. Within this zone, the ability of the host to clear contaminating bacteria may be compromised, and this can lead to biofilm formation on the surface of the biomaterial. Currently, there are only limited data on the mechanisms behind this increased risk of infection and the role of material choice. The impacts of implant material on bacterial adhesion, immune response and infection susceptibility have been investigated individually in numerous preclinical in vitro and in vivo studies. These data provide an indication that material choice does have an impact on infection susceptibility; however, the clinical implications remain to be clearly determined.

show abstract

Length‐Scale Mediated Differential Adhesion of Mammalian Cells and Microbes

Cited by 70 publications

References 45 publications

Poly(ethylene glycol) as a biointeractive electron‐beam resist

Poly(ethylene glycol) as a biointeractive electron‐beam resist

Biomaterial-Associated Infection: Locating the Finish Line in the Race for the Surface

Influence of material on the development of device-associated infections

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About