Mucosal Substitutes for Periodontal Soft Tissue Regeneration

PK, Swati Gupta Pratibha

doi:10.4172/2161-1122.1000327

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Wound closure options include the use of various medications, such as povidone iodine, which can promote healing by maintaining the cleanliness of the wound defect . Another approach is the use of synthetic materials, e.g., based on silk, silicone, or biodegradable polymers such as poly(lactic- co -glycolic acid) . Increasingly, biosynthetic substitutes for mucosal and skin grafts/flaps are being used to overcome the limitations of autografts and allografts, such as epidermal (e.g., Apligraf), dermal (e.g., Alloderm, Matriderm), and composite membranes (e.g., Integra, Biobrane, Dermagraft, Silastic) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Piezoelectric and Dielectric Electrospun Fluoropolymer Membranes for Oral Mucosa Regeneration: A Comparative Study

Chernova,

Varakuta,

Koniaeva

et al. 2024

ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wound healing of the oral mucosa is an urgent problem in modern dental surgical practice. This research article presents and compares the findings of the investigations of the structural, physicochemical, and biological characteristics of two types of polymeric membranes used for the regeneration of oral mucosa. The membranes were prepared from poly-(tetrafluoroethylene) (PTFE) and a copolymer of vinylidene fluoride and tetrafluoroethylene (VDF-TeFE) and analyzed via scanning electron microscopy, atomic force microscopy, X-ray diffraction analysis, and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. Investigation results obtained indicate that both types of membranes are composed of thin fibers: (0.57 ± 0.25) μm for PTFE membranes and (0.43 ± 0.14) μm for VDF-TeFE membranes. Moreover, the fibers of VDF-TeFE membranes exhibit distinct piezoelectric properties, which are confirmed by piezoresponse force microscopy and X-ray diffraction. Both types of membranes are hydrophobic: (139.7 ± 2.5)°for PTFE membranes and (133.5 ± 2.0)°for VDF-TeFE membranes. In vitro assays verify that both membrane types did not affect the growth and division of mice fibroblasts of the 3T3-L1 cell line, with a cell viability in the range of 88−101%. Finally, in vivo comparative experiments carried out using Wistar rats demonstrate that the piezoelectric VDF-TeFE membranes have a high ability to regenerate oral mucosa.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%