Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Materials Letters
j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / m a t l e t
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: In this study, natural agarose and agar polysaccharides were successfully developed to novel fibrous form for
Received 15 May 2010 the first time via wet-spinning. Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)/H2O = 9:1(v/v) mixture was used as an
Accepted 4 August 2010 appropriate solvent which was amenable to the wet-spinning process that produced continuous agarose and
Available online 7 August 2010
agar fibers in ethanol coagulation bath. Results of SEM investigation, swelling ratio and tensile test suggested
that the smooth and homogeneous agarose fibers had considerable water swelling capacity (400–500%) and
Keywords:
tensile strength (30–50 MPa). The agar fiber showed better water swelling capacity than the agarose fiber;
Agarose
Agar
however the existence of agaropectin leads to its flexibility flaws. These results demonstrate that the agarose
Wet-spinning fiber fabricated in this study is a good candidate material for wound-dressing applications.
Fiber technology © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Mechanical properties
0167-577X/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.matlet.2010.08.008
2436 X. Bao et al. / Materials Letters 64 (2010) 2435–2437
Table 1
Mechanical properties of agarose fiber, agar fiber and various representative wound-
dressings.
AG1 fiber (Mw: 100~200 kDa) 32.7 ± 2.7 576 ± 53 47.0 ± 2.0
AG2 fiber (Mw: 200~300 kDa) 50.8 ± 2.4 807 ± 44 62.8 ± 7.5
AR1 fiber (Mw: 200~300 kDa) 28.3 ± 3.1 551 ± 51 12.7 ± 1.4
AR2 fiber (Mw: 500~600 kDa) 36.0 ± 5.5 692 ± 68 10.7 ± 2
Electrospun gelatin mat [11] 1.6 ± 0.6 490 ± 52 17.0 ± 4.4
Electrospun collagen mat [12] 11.4 ± 1.2 N.A. N.A.
Resolut LT regenerative membrane 11.7 N.A. 20
(Gore). Glycolide fiber mesh coated
with an occlusive PDLGA membrane
[13]
Fig. 3. Swelling ratio of agarose and agar fibers. Kaltostat (ConvaTec) Calcium/sodium 0.9 1.3 ± 0.2 10.8 ± 0.4
alginate fleece [14]
AR2, 500%). Since agaropectin contained in agar was a heterogeneous
mixture of smaller branched and sulfated molecules, the agar fiber
showed better hydrophilicity than the agarose fiber. Moreover, the weak mechanical properties. Moreover, since mechanical and
molecular weight was an impact on the agar fiber swelling ratio: physical properties are closely related to morphological structure,
higher molecular weight agar fiber (AR2) showed relatively low AR2 fibers with highest molecular weight yet nonuniform structure
swelling ratio. This is mainly due to the long-chain molecules (Fig. 2 d1, d2) showed lowest elongation at break.
interwoven with each other making it difficult to form a network
structure which is conducive to water absorption (Fig. 3). 4. Conclusion
The mechanical properties of a wound dressing are important
factors in its performance, whether it is typically used to protect Continuous agarose and agar fibers have been produced for the
cutaneous wounds or as an internal wound support, for surgical tissue first time using a wet-spinning process in DMSO/H2O solvent. With
defects, i.e., in the clinical setting, appropriate mechanical properties this simple spinning process, the obtained agarose fibers with
of dressing materials are needed to ensure that the dressing will not homogeneous appearance showed desirable swelling ratio, tensile
be damaged by handling. strength, modules and breaking elongation. Agar fibers were also
As shown in Fig. 4, the agarose fibers showed plastic deformation fabricated; AR1 fiber had a uniform appearance, while AR2 had a
of the specimens occurs while the agar fiber showed a typical brittle nonuniform circular cross-section, rough surface morphology and
fracture, after an initial elastic deformation. As illustrated in Table 1, brittleness deformation. All the fibers showed considerable swelling
AG1, AG2, AR1, and AR2 fibers demonstrated higher tensile strength ratio. Based on these results, we considered that agarose fibers could
and elastic modulus than most of the representative wound-dressing be a potential material for wound-dressing or other biomedical
materials currently used or studied. Among which, the tensile applications.
strength for AG2 is 50.8 MPa, 4.5 times higher tensile strength than
electrospun collagen mat [12]; elongation at break is 62.8%, 3.7 times Acknowledgement
higher than electrospun gelatin mat [11]; the elastic modulus is
807 MPa, almost 1.6 times higher than the electrospun gelatin mat This work was supported by Grant-in-Aid for Global COE program
[11]. AG2 fibers of higher molecular weight (200–300 kDa) showed by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology.
better tensile properties than AG1 fibers which happen to AR2 fibers
when compared to AR1 fibers, showing the tremendous effect of References
molecular weight on the mechanical properties in both cases. This is
[1] Marinho-Soriano E, Bourret E. Bioresour Technol 2003;90:329–33.
because longer chain serves to transfer load more effectively to the [2] Xue Zhi-Xin, Yang Gui-Peng, Wang Guang-Ce, Niu Jian-Feng, Cao Xiao-Yan. J Appl
polymer backbone by strengthening intermolecular interactions. For Polym Sci 2006;103(4):2759–66.
AG2 and AR1 which had similar molecular weight, AR1 fiber showed [3] Sakai S, Kawabata K, Ono T, Ijima H, Kawakami K. Biomaterials 2005;26(23):
4786–92.
declined mechanical properties than AG1 fiber. This can be attributed [4] Watanabe J, Kashii M, Hirao M, Oka K, Sugamoto K, Yoshikawa H, et al. J Biomed
mainly to the presence of small molecular agaropectin which had Mater Res 2007;83A:845–52.
[5] Scholten HJ, Pierik RLM. Sci Hortic 1998;77(1–2):109–16.
[6] Kickhöfen Botho, Wokalek Heinrich, Scheel Doris, Ruh Helga. Biomaterials 1986;7
(1):67–72.
[7] Teng Shu-Hua, Wang Peng, Kim Hyoun-Ee. Mater Lett 2009;63:2510–25.
[8] Um In Chul, Kweon HaeYong, Lee Kwang Gill, Ihm Dae Woo, Lee Jang-Hern, Park
Young Hwan. Int J Biol Macromol 2004;34(1–2):89–105.
[9] Meredith R. Text Prog 1975;7(4):1–74.
[10] Ovington Liza G. Clin Dermatol 2007;25(1):33–8.
[11] Lee J, Tae G, Kim YH, Park IS, Kim SH, Kim SH. Biomaterials 2008;29(12):1872–9.
[12] Rho KS, Jeong L, Lee G, Seo BM, Park YJ, Hong SD, et al. Biomaterials 2006;27(8):
1452–61.
[13] Milella E, Ramires PA, Brescia E, La Sala G, Di Paola L, Bruno V. J Biomed Mater Res
2001;58(4):427–35.
[14] Chiu CT, Lee JS, Chu CS, Chang YP, Wang YJ. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2008;19(6):
2503–13.