4.6 Article

Salt-Induced Regenerative Surface for Bacteria Killing and Release

期刊

LANGMUIR
卷 33, 期 28, 页码 7160-7168

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.langmuir.7b01333

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [51673175]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province [LY16E030012]
  3. Zhejiang Top Priority Discipline of Textile Science and Engineering [2015KF06]
  4. Public Projects of Zhejiang Province [2015C31040]
  5. Zhejiang Province Department of Education [Y201328505]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Antibacterial surfaces with both bacteria killing and release functions show great promise in biological and biomedical applications, in particular for reusable medical devices. However, these surfaces either require a sophisticated technique to create delicate structures or need rigorous stimuli to trigger the functions, greatly limiting their practical application. In this study, we made a step forward by developing a simple system based on a salt responsive polyzwitterionic brush. Specifically, the salt-responsive brush of poly(3-(dimethyl (4-vinylbenzyl) ammonium) propyl sulfonate) (polyDVBAPS) was endowed with bactericidal function by grafting an effective bactericide, i.e, triclosan (TCS). This simple functionalization successfully integrated the bacteria attach/release function of polyDVBAPS and bactericidal function of TCS. As a result, the surface could kill more than 95% attached bacteria and, subsequently, could rapidly detach similar to 97% bacteria after gently shaking in 1.0 M NaCl for 10 min. More importantly, such high killing efficiency and release rate could be well retained (unchanged effectiveness of both killing and release after four severe killing/release cycles), indicating the highly efficient regeneration and long-term reusability of this system. This study not only contributes zwitterionic polymers by conferring new functions but also provides a new, highly efficient and reliable surface for killing-release antibacterial strategy.

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