4.6 Article

Mussel-mimicking sulfobetaine-based copolymer with metal tunable gelation, self-healing and antibacterial capability

期刊

ARABIAN JOURNAL OF CHEMISTRY
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 193-204

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.arabjc.2017.03.009

关键词

Polysulfobetaine; Metal coordination; Antibacterial; Self-healing; Hydrogels; Catecholamine polymers

资金

  1. Qatar University [QUUG-CAM-2017-1]
  2. Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic - Program NPU I [LO1504]
  3. Maersk Oil R&TC Qatar project
  4. Qatar National Research Fund (Qatar Foundation) [9 - 219-2-105]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the present study, the sulfobetaine-based copolymer bearing a dopamine functionality showed gel formation adjusted by the application of metal salts for gelation and various values of pH. Normally, the liquid-like solution of the sulfobetaine-based copolymer and metal cross-linkers is transformed to a gel-like state upon increasing the pH values in the presence of Fe3+ and Ti3+. Metal-induced coordination is reversible by means of the application of EDTA as a chelating agent. In the case of Ag+ ions, the gel is formed through a redox process accompanied with the oxidative coupling of the dopamine moieties and Ag-0 particle formation. Mussel-mimicking and metal-dependent viscoelastic properties were observed for Fe3+, Ti3+, and Ag+ cross-linking agents, with additionally enhanced self-healing behavior in comparison with the covalently cross-linked IO4- analogues. Antibacterial properties can be achieved both in solution and on the surface using the proper concentration of Ag+ ions used for gelation; thus, a tunable amount of the Ag-0 particles are formed in the hydrogel. The cytotoxicity was elucidated by the both MTT assay on the NIH/3T3 fibroblast cell line and direct contact method using human dermal fibroblast cell (F121) and shows the non-toxic character of the synthesized copolymer. (C) 2017 The Authors. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University.

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