Industrial-scale needle-less electrospinning of tetracycline-immobilized nanofibrous scaffolds using a polycaprolactone/polyethylene oxide/chitosan blend for wound healing
Source abstract
Abstract
Nanofibrous scaffolds offer significant promise for wound healing due to their ability to absorb exudates, prevent microbial contamination, and enhance oxygen diffusion. However, challenges remain in fully realizing their clinical potential, as previous research has primarily focused on scaffolds made of two polymers or those encapsulating therapeutic agents within nanofibers. Additionally, scaling up fabrication while maintaining functionality presents a significant challenge. This study introduces a novel type of nanofibrous scaffold, combining poly (ethylene oxide) (PEO), poly (caprolactone) (PCL), and chitosan (CS) in various mass ratios, electrospun using Nanospider™ technology. The scaffolds featured fiber diameters ranging from 134 ± 37 to 148 ± 38 nm and exhibit high gram-per-square-meter values between 6.8 and 8.6 g/m 2 . An optimal balance of hydrophilicity was achieved, and the scaffolds demonstrated superior breathability with moisture vapor transmission rates ranging from 1904.3 ± 28.6 to 2005.7 ± 42.9 g/m 2 /day, outperforming commercial wound dressings. Additionally, a wide range of hydrolytic degradation rates (3.8 ± 1% to 73.2 ± 0.8%), elongation at fracture (21% to 0.8%), and Young’s modulus (106.7 ± 8.5 MPa to 170.7 ± 11.9 MPa) were observed. Surface-immobilized tetracycline (TET) significantly enhanced antibacterial efficacy, with inhibition zones exceeding 20 mm against Escherichia coli . Our findings confirm that scaffold properties can be effectively tailored by adjusting the PEO/PCL ratio, advancing customization for wound care. Post-fabrication soaking in TET solutions further boosts antibacterial performance and allows for tailored post-production adjustments. Compared to existing studies, this approach simplifies customization and improves the practicality of wound care solutions.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Electrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications · Wound Healing and Treatments · Silk-based biomaterials and applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Technical University of Liberec
Institute for Nanomaterials, Advanced Technologies and Innovation, Technical University of Liberec
Regional Hospital Liberec, a.s.
Funding
Ministerstvo Skolstvi, Mladeze a Telovychovy
References (100+)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1590/abd1806-4841.2016474110.1590/abd1806-4841.20164741 ↗
2. 10.20473/jn.v15i1.1659710.20473/jn.v15i1.16597 ↗
3. 10.1021/acsnano.1c0420610.1021/acsnano.1c04206 ↗
4. 10.3390/gels1001004310.3390/gels10010043 ↗
5. 10.1002/smll.20230058910.1002/smll.202300589 ↗
6. 10.3390/gels909069410.3390/gels9090694 ↗
7. 10.1002/path.436010.1002/path.4360 ↗
8. 10.54783/ijsoc.v3i1.29510.54783/ijsoc.v3i1.295 ↗
9. 10.3390/gels902010010.3390/gels9020100 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2024.12411910.1016/j.ijpharm.2024.124119 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.reth.2023.08.00710.1016/j.reth.2023.08.007 ↗
12. 10.3390/pharmaceutics1507182910.3390/pharmaceutics15071829 ↗
13. 10.2217/nnm-2017-001710.2217/nnm-2017-0017 ↗
14. 10.3390/pharmaceutics1309152710.3390/pharmaceutics13091527 ↗
15. 10.1177/1528083724125539610.1177/15280837241255396 ↗
16. 10.1002/mame.20190034910.1002/mame.201900349 ↗
17. 10.1177/1528083723119632710.1177/15280837231196327 ↗
18. 10.1177/1528083723117608310.1177/15280837231176083 ↗
19. 10.3390/jfb1405028810.3390/jfb14050288 ↗
20. 10.3390/polym1615222210.3390/polym16152222 ↗
21. Jirsak O Sanetrnik F Lukas D et al. A method of nanofibres production from a polymer solution using electrostatic spinning and a device for carrying out the method. WO2005024101A1 (Patent) 2003.
22. 10.3390/pharmaceutics1302028610.3390/pharmaceutics13020286 ↗
23. 10.22376/ijlpr.2023.13.1.SP1.P127-14010.22376/ijlpr.2023.13.1.SP1.P127-140 ↗
24. Muthukrishnan L, Rajendran S, Maniam G, et al. Electrospun nanofibers for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine: a review. J Biomed Sci 2020; 27: 12.
25. 10.3390/biomimetics703008710.3390/biomimetics7030087 ↗
26. 10.1021/acsabm.4c0031810.1021/acsabm.4c00318 ↗
27. 10.1007/s00396-022-04997-910.1007/s00396-022-04997-9 ↗
28. 10.1049/iet-nbt.2014.006610.1049/iet-nbt.2014.0066 ↗
29. 10.1021/acsami.3c0971310.1021/acsami.3c09713 ↗
30. 10.1002/app.5474610.1002/app.54746 ↗
31. 10.1111/dth.1568210.1111/dth.15682 ↗
32. Johnson M, Smith AR, Lee K. Advanced wound healing scaffolds: a comprehensive review on structure, composition, and performance. J Biomed Mater Res, Part A 2020; 108(5): 1234–1245.
33. Rajinikanth BS, Rajkumar DSR, Vijayaragavan V. Chitosan-based biomaterial in wound healing: a review. Cureus 2024; 16(2): e55193.
34. 10.1586/eri.11.5910.1586/eri.11.59 ↗
35. 10.3390/fib1203002610.3390/fib12030026 ↗
36. 10.1002/jbm.b.3165110.1002/jbm.b.31651 ↗
37. 10.1002/jbm.b.3155410.1002/jbm.b.31554 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.12966810.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.129668 ↗
39. 10.1039/C6TB03223K10.1039/C6TB03223K ↗
40. 10.1002/btm2.1025410.1002/btm2.10254 ↗
41. 10.3390/polym1610133310.3390/polym16101333 ↗
42. 10.3390/ijms1109352910.3390/ijms11093529 ↗
43. 10.1002/jcb.2880810.1002/jcb.28808 ↗
44. Pezhman M, Hossein N, Zahed A, et al. Fabrication and characterization of polycaprolactone/chitosan nanofibers containing antibacterial agents of curcumin and ZnO nanoparticles for use as wound dressing. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2022; 10.
45. 10.3390/polym1601002410.3390/polym16010024 ↗
46. 10.3390/biom1301018410.3390/biom13010184 ↗
47. 10.3390/membranes1205053610.3390/membranes12050536 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2021.11892610.1016/j.carbpol.2021.118926 ↗
49. 10.3390/molecules2806250110.3390/molecules28062501 ↗
50. 10.3390/gels903017310.3390/gels9030173 ↗
51. Alotaibi B, Khan AK, Kharaba Z, et al. Development of poly(vinyl alcohol)–chitosan composite nanofibers for dual drug therapy of wounds. ACS Omega 2024; 9(11): 12825–12834.
52. 10.3390/membranes1110077010.3390/membranes11100770 ↗
53. 10.1021/acsabm.9b0058910.1021/acsabm.9b00589 ↗
54. 10.3390/polym1110160210.3390/polym11101602 ↗
55. 10.1021/acsomega.3c0635410.1021/acsomega.3c06354 ↗
56. Zhang H, Chen Y, Zhang L, et al. An overview of recent advances in electrospun nanofibers for tissue engineering. J Mater Chem B 2023; 11(15): 3294–3314.
57. Zhang X, Yang Q, Li Y, et al. Electrospun nanofibers for tissue engineering applications: current state and future perspectives. Mater Sci Eng C 2023; 148: 115762.
58. 10.3390/ijms2303189510.3390/ijms23031895 ↗
59. 10.3390/polym905018310.3390/polym9050183 ↗
60. 10.1049/iet-nbt.2017.011510.1049/iet-nbt.2017.0115 ↗
61. Ninomiya T, Yamamoto M, Takahashi K, et al. Chitosan scaffolds for tissue engineering: a review. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2012; 23(5): 1081–1090.
62. 10.1108/RJTA-12-02-2008-B00910.1108/RJTA-12-02-2008-B009 ↗
63. 10.1016/j.matlet.2019.12661810.1016/j.matlet.2019.126618 ↗
64. 10.1039/D0RA06865A10.1039/D0RA06865A ↗
65. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.06.19510.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.06.195 ↗
66. 10.1166/jctn.2017.657810.1166/jctn.2017.6578 ↗
67. 10.1016/0001-8686(94)80040-510.1016/0001-8686(94)80040-5 ↗
68. 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2012.05.03810.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2012.05.038 ↗
69. 10.1021/la00032a05510.1021/la00032a055 ↗
70. British Standards Institute. BS EN 13726-1:2002. Test methods for primary wound dressings. Part 2: moisture vapour transmission rate of permeable film dressings. London: BSI, 2002.
71. International Organization for Standardization. ISO 10993-5: biological evaluation of medical devices. Part 5: test for in vitro cytotoxicity. Geneva: ISO, 2009.
72. 10.1155/2014/78976510.1155/2014/789765 ↗
73. 10.2147/IJN.S37190010.2147/IJN.S371900 ↗
74. 10.3390/pharmaceutics1602015910.3390/pharmaceutics16020159 ↗
75. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.798.5310.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.798.53 ↗
76. 10.1021/acsabm.9b0082310.1021/acsabm.9b00823 ↗
77. 10.1021/acsabm.8b0063710.1021/acsabm.8b00637 ↗
78. 10.1007/s12565-016-0352-z10.1007/s12565-016-0352-z ↗
79. 10.1021/acsanm.3c0244310.1021/acsanm.3c02443 ↗
80. 10.1007/s10856-012-4577-710.1007/s10856-012-4577-7 ↗
81. Dalton M, Ebrahimi F, Xu H, et al. The influence of the molecular weight of poly(ethylene oxide) on the hydrolytic degradation and physical properties of polycaprolactone binary blends. Macromolecules (Washington, DC, U S) 2023; 3: 431–450.
82. 10.1016/j.jcis.2004.02.00110.1016/j.jcis.2004.02.001 ↗
83. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.03.02710.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.03.027 ↗
84. 10.1016/j.mex.2024.10258310.1016/j.mex.2024.102583 ↗
85. 10.1002/adma.20030513610.1002/adma.200305136 ↗
86. Guo Y, Zhang L, Cao F, et al. Surface modification of nanofibers for biomedical applications. Adv Mater Res 2013; 875: 481–485.
87. Zhu Y, Yang X, Han C. Polyethylene oxide-based biodegradable hydrogels for wound dressings. J Mater Chem B 2016; 4(21): 3747–3759.
88. Li X, Wu D, Zeng J, et al. Biodegradable polycaprolactone-based scaffolds for tissue engineering: review and advances. J Biomed Mater Res, Part A 2018; 106(1): 63–82.
89. Zhang Y, Yu T, Zhang Z. Controlled degradation of polycaprolactone-based biomaterials for wound healing applications. Biomater Sci 2017; 5(7): 1389–1401.
90. 10.1039/D2RA07673J10.1039/D2RA07673J ↗
91. 10.1002/mabi.20190005810.1002/mabi.201900058 ↗
92. Ahearn DJ, Hsu R, Yung A, et al. Hydrophilic dressings for enhanced wound healing: a review of recent developments. Wound Repair Regen 2016; 24(1): 18–26.
93. 10.3390/membranes1112090810.3390/membranes11120908 ↗
94. 10.1093/rb/rbae06310.1093/rb/rbae063 ↗
95. Gupta P, Sharma S, Singh A, et al. Evaluation of hydrophilicity in wound healing patches. J Biomed Mater Res 2020; 108(6): 1200–1210.
96. Khan Y, Khan MM, Syed SMI. Polycaprolactone (PCL) and its composite properties: a review. J Mater Sci Technol 2020; 40: 55–78.
97. Yuan X, Liao MHH, Tseng TY. Mechanical properties of PEO/PCL blends and their potential applications. Polym Eng Sci 2008; 48(11): 2115–2123.
98. Burgess DR. Mechanical properties of human skin. J Biomech 2001; 34(6): 719–724.
99. Kalra A, Lowe A, Ai Jumaily AM. Mechanical behaviour of skin: a review. J Mater Sci Eng 2016; 5: 4.
100. 10.1111/iwj.1466810.1111/iwj.14668 ↗