Oxidized Cellulose Enhanced Collagen Hydrogels†

doi:10.7503/cjcu20150520

Abstract

Abstract:

Aldehyde-functionalized cellulose(DAC) was obtained by the oxidization of cellulose, and was applied as a macromolecular crosslinker to modify the collagen(Col) hydrogel. The structures and properties of oxidized cellulose modified collagen(Col/DAC) hydrogels were characterized with SEM observation, mechanical test and rheology analysis. The results show that the mechanical properties and thermal stability of Col/DAC hydrogels are significantly improved compared to the pristine Col hydrogel, especially the breaking compression strength of Col/DAC hydrogel can be more than one order of magnitude higher than the pristine Col hydrogel. In addition, it is shown that introducing of oxidized cellulose does not bring the cytotoxicity that is often seen from the conventional chemical crosslinking method, and maintains the good biocompatibility of the final product. Therefore, such a biocompatible and strong collagen hydrogel obtained from the oxidized cellulose modification may have the great potential in tissue engineering and other biomedical fields.

Key words: Oxidized cellulose, Protein, Polysaccharide, Tissue engineering, Collagen hydrogel, Mechanical property

CLC Number:

O636

TrendMD:

ZHANG Xia, ZHOU Hao, YANG Yuhong, HUANG Yufang, CHEN Xin. Oxidized Cellulose Enhanced Collagen Hydrogels^†[J]. Chem. J. Chinese Universities, 2015, 36(10): 2040.

Figures/Tables 10

Fig.1 FTIR spectra of oxidized cellulose(a) and pristine cellulose(b)

Fig.2 Wide X-ray diffraction patterns of oxidized cellulose(a) and pristine cellulose(b)

Fig.3 SEM images of the pristine collagen(Col) hydrogel(A) and collagen/oxidized cellulose(Col/DAC) hydrogel(B) after freezing dry(mass ratio of Col and DAC 50/50)

Fig.4 Comparison of the breaking compression strength of the hydrogels with different mass ratio of Col and DAC([Col]=6 mg/mL)

Fig.5 Comparison of storage modulus(a, c) and loss modulus(b, d) as a function of time of Col/DAC hydrogel(a, b) and pristine Col hydrogel(c, d)

Fig.6 Comparison of storage modulus(a, c) and loss modulus(b, d) as a function of temperature of Col/DAC hydrogel(a, b) and pristine Col hydrogel(c, d)

Fig.7 Comparison of storage modulus(a, c) and loss modulus(b, d) as a function of time of Col/DAC hydrogel(a, b) and pristine Col hydrogel(c, d) after the introduction of guanidinium chloride

Fig.8 Microscopic images of cell growth and attachment on different hydrogels after 24 h of cultureMass ratio of Col/DAC: (A) 100/0(Pristine Col); (B) 90/10; (C) 70/30; (D) 50/50; (E) 30/70; (F) control.

Fig.9 Fluorescence microscopic images of cell growth and attachment on different hydrogels after 24 h of cultureMass ratio of Col/DAC: (A) 100/0(Pristine Col); (B) 90/10; (C) 70/30; (D) 50/50; (E) 30/70; (F) control.

Fig.10 Cytotoxicity of the pristine Col and Col/DAC hydrogels for L929 cells after incubation for 24 h() and 72 h()

References 19

[1]	Hynes R. O., Science, 2009, 326(5957), 1216—1219
[2]	Davis G. E., Senger D. R., Circulation Research, 2005, 97(11), 1093—1107
[3]	Kim I. L., Mauck R. L., Burdick J. A., Biomaterials, 2011, 32(34), 8771—8782
[4]	Drury J. L., Mooney D. J., Biomaterials, 2003, 24(24), 4337—4351
[5]	Lee K. Y., Mooney D. J., Chemical Reviews, 2001, 101(7), 1869—1880
[6]	Zheng Q. H., Li N., Tian Y., Wu D., Zhao Y. W., Li L. H., Zhou C. R., Chem. J. Chinese Universities, 2014, 35(8), 1658—1664
	(曾庆慧, 李摇娜, 田摇冶, 吴摇狄, 赵要, 李立华, 周长忍. 高等学校化学学报,2014, 35(8), 1658—1664)
[7]	Lee C. R., Grodzinsky A. J., Spector M., Biomaterials, 2001, 22(23), 3145—3154
[8]	Park S., Park J., Kim H. O., Song M. J., Suh H., Biomaterials, 2002, 23(4), 1205—1212
[9]	Schoof H., Apel J., Heschel I., Rau G., Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, 2001, 58(4), 352—357
[10]	Tan W., Krishnaraj R., Desai T. A., Tissue Engineering, 2001, 7(2), 203—210
[11]	Chen S., Wu Y., Mi F., Lin Y., Yu L., Sung H., Journal of Controlled Release, 2004, 96(2), 285—300
[12]	Moon R. J., Martini A., Nairn J., Simonsen J., Youngblood J., Chemical Society Reviews, 2011, 40(7), 3941—3994
[13]	Abdul K. H., Bhat A. H., Ireana Y. A. F., Carbohydrate Polymers, 2012, 87(2), 963—979
[14]	Klemm D., Heublein B., Fink H. P., Bohn A., Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2005, 44(22), 3358—3393
[15]	Geng C. Z., Hu X., Yang G. H., Zhang Q., Chen F., Fu Q., Chinese Journal of Polymer Science, 2015, 33(1), 61—69
[16]	Zhang X., Yang Y. H., Yao J. R., Shao Z. Z., Chen X., ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 2014, 2(5), 1318—1324
[17]	Kim U., Kuga S., Wada M., Okano T., Kondo T., Biomacromolecules, 2000, 1(3), 488—492
[18]	ISO 10993.12-2004, Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices, Part 12: Sample Preparation and Reference Materials, British Standards Institution, 2004
[19]	Sirviö J., Liimatainen H., Niinimäki J., Hormi O., Carbohydrate Polymers, 2011, 86(1), 260—265