4.6 Article

Development of bacterial cellulose and polycaprolactone (PCL) based composite for medical material

期刊

SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY AND PHARMACY
卷 20, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scp.2021.100404

关键词

Bacterial cellulose; Polycaprolactone; Nata de coco; Film casting

资金

  1. Faculty of Science and Technology [SciGR1/2564]
  2. National Research Council of Thailand
  3. Thammasat University Research Unit in Textile and Polymer Chemistry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study investigated the structural, morphological, thermal, swelling, and degradation properties of PolyCaprolactone (PCL) and bacterial cellulose (BC) composite. It was found that the increase in BC content led to an increase in O-H stretching intensity and a decrease in crystallinity percentage. Porosity was observed in the microstructure of BC/PCL composite.
Polycaprolactone (PCL)/bacterial cellulose (BC) composite was successfully prepared via film casting. BC was extracted from nata de coco using alkaline purification. 1%,5%,10%,20%,30% and 50% v/v of BC was incorporated into PCL composite. The structural, morphological, thermal, swelling, and degradation properties were investigated. It was found that the intensity of O-H stretching was observed with respect to amount of BC content. However, with high BC content, the percent of crystallinity was decreased. Porosity was observed as a microstructure of BC/PCL composite. It was remarkable to note that thermal decomposition behavior was stable up to 400 degrees C. The crystallization temperature was increased, whereas the melting temperature was decreased, when high amount of BC was integrated. No significant change of swelling behavior was observed for DI water and PBS solution when BC was added. The swelling behavior and degradation properties were observed for 6 h and 4 weeks, respectively. Therefore, bacterial cellulose and polycaprolactone based composite can significantly be provide the benefit as an excellent candidate for wound dressing application.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据