journal article·2021-12-01

In Vitro Degradation of Silk Fibroin/Hyaluronic Acid Composite Hydrogels

Shixian Chen, Wenjing Yang, Shuqin Yan, Guocong Han, Qiang Zhang

AATCC Journal of Research· Volume 8· Issue 2_suppl
Publisher page

Abstract

Protein-polysaccharide scaffolds are usually used in tissue engineering; however, matching regeneration rate with healing modes is a challenge because of unpredictable scaffold degradation profiles. We investigated the effect of the blend ratio on degradation behavior of silk fibroin (SF)/hyaluronic acid (HA) hydrogels by varying weight ratios. The hydrogels were incubated in 1 U/mL collagenase IA at 37 °C to create an in vitro model of proteolytic degradation. Samples were harvested at designated time points up to 21 days and scanning electron microscopy (SEM), digital photos, and mass loss were investigated. Control samples were incubated in phosphate-buffered saline. The results showed regular and controllable degradability. The higher the HA content, the stronger the degradability of the hydrogel. When the HA content increased from 20% to 40%, the mass loss of the hydrogel increased from 22% to 35% after 21 days of degradation.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Silk-based biomaterials and applications · Electrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications · Polymer Surface Interaction Studies

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

Affiliations

School of Textile Science and Engineering, Wuhan Textile University

References (17)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00340-510.1016/S0142-9612(03)00340-5 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.actbio.2015.11.05310.1016/j.actbio.2015.11.053 ↗
3. 10.1021/acs.biomac.5b0109110.1021/acs.biomac.5b01091 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.11972910.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.119729 ↗
5. 10.1002/adma.20050176510.1002/adma.200501765 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.03.04610.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.03.046 ↗
7. 10.1002/bip.2303010.1002/bip.23030 ↗
8. Brown J.E. · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2016 · 214 · 11810.1016/j.ajog.2015.08.046 ↗
9. 10.1021/bm034546010.1021/bm0345460 ↗
10. 10.1002/term.198110.1002/term.1981 ↗
11. Chirila T.V. · Handbook of Biomaterial. Properties; · 125
12. 10.1021/bm101050410.1021/bm1010504 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.06.13810.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.06.138 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2014.07.02910.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2014.07.029 ↗
15. Zhang Q. · Acta Biomaterialia · 2012 · 8 · 2628e38
16. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.10720410.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107204 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.09.02010.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.09.020 ↗