journal article·2018-08

Nanoparticles and Liposomes for the Surface Modification of Implants: A Comparative Study of Spraying and Dipping Techniques

Benjamin S. Seitz, Nikola Plenagl, Michael Raschpichler, Hendrik Vögeling, Matthias Wojcik, Shashank R. Pinnapireddy, Jana Brüßler, Udo Bakowsky

physica status solidi (a)· Volume 215· Issue 15
Publisher page

Abstract

Polysiloxane and polyurethane are one of the most commonly employed synthetic polymers for medical devices. Both materials are inexpensive and can be modified easily. The layer‐by‐layer technique is a well‐documented method for surface modification. There are only two ways to modify large surface areas i.e. dipping and spraying. Both methods can be used to create anti‐adhesive, antibacterial and anti‐inflammatory layers. Particle density on the surface is an important parameter for preventing biofilm formation, bacterial adhesion and release of active agents. There should be an optimal number of particles covering the coated surface due to its direct correlation with the release of active agent (per time) and contact area with bacteria. Preliminary studies using regular dipping technique of layer‐by‐layer method have not produced substantial particle densities. Therefore, spraying method is employed using an atomiser to produce a fine mist containing norfloxacin‐loaded nanoparticles and liposomes. An optimal density of particles on the implant surface together with a homogeneous distribution is achieved using this method.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Electrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications · Polymer Surface Interaction Studies · Bone Tissue Engineering Materials

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Pharmaceutics and Biopharmaceutics, University of Marburg Robert‐Koch‐Str. 4 35037 Marburg Germany

References (28)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2004.00350.x10.1111/j.1600-6143.2004.00350.x ↗
2. 10.1056/NEJMra03541510.1056/NEJMra035415 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2017.08.07210.1016/j.ijpharm.2017.08.072 ↗
4. 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)10006-X10.1016/S0140-6736(97)10006-X ↗
5. 10.1002/pssa.20100111810.1002/pssa.201001118 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.msec.2013.03.03310.1016/j.msec.2013.03.033 ↗
7. 10.1093/jac/dkp49910.1093/jac/dkp499 ↗
8. 10.3390/polym301034010.3390/polym3010340 ↗
9. 10.1159/00031826510.1159/000318265 ↗
10. 10.1023/A:101650042922510.1023/A:1016500429225 ↗
11. 10.7326/0003-4819-144-2-200601170-0000910.7326/0003-4819-144-2-200601170-00009 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.addr.2012.09.00410.1016/j.addr.2012.09.004 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2006.06.00110.1016/j.progpolymsci.2006.06.001 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.ejpb.2010.12.00710.1016/j.ejpb.2010.12.007 ↗
15. 10.1073/pnas.86.20.766310.1073/pnas.86.20.7663 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.bbamem.2004.07.00310.1016/j.bbamem.2004.07.003 ↗
17. Olbrich C. · Biomaterials · 2006 · 27 · 3549
18. Chobot V. · Ceska a Slovenska farmacie · 1995 · 44 · 190
19. 10.1021/jm100166610.1021/jm1001666 ↗
20. 10.1002/jps.2052010.1002/jps.20520 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.jconrel.2007.01.00910.1016/j.jconrel.2007.01.009 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2014.02.02910.1016/j.colsurfb.2014.02.029 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2017.06.02210.1016/j.colsurfb.2017.06.022 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.ejpb.2009.09.00510.1016/j.ejpb.2009.09.005 ↗
25. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AST.57.14810.4028/www.scientific.net/AST.57.148 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.ejpb.2015.04.00910.1016/j.ejpb.2015.04.009 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.12.07510.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.12.075 ↗
28. 10.1016/S0923-1811(97)00611-710.1016/S0923-1811(97)00611-7 ↗