Effect of process parameters on additive-free electrospinning of regenerated silk fibroin nonwovens.
Additive-free electrospinning
Fibroin
Nanofiber
Scaffolds
Silk
Journal
Bioactive materials
ISSN: 2452-199X
Titre abrégé: Bioact Mater
Pays: China
ID NLM: 101685294
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2020
Jun 2020
Historique:
received:
27
10
2019
revised:
18
01
2020
accepted:
20
01
2020
entrez:
4
3
2020
pubmed:
4
3
2020
medline:
4
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Silk fibroin is a biomaterial with multiple beneficial properties for use in regenerative medicine and tissue engineering. When dissolving and processing the reconstituted silk fibroin solution by electrospinning, the arrangement and size of fibers can be manifold varied and according fiber diameters reduced to the nanometer range. Such nonwovens show high porosity as well as potential biocompatibility. Usually, electrospinning of most biomaterials demands for the application of additives, which enable stable electrospinning by adjusting viscosity, and are intended to evaporate during processing or to be washed out afterwards. However, the use of such additives increases costs and has to be taken into account in terms of biological risks when used for biomedical applications. In this study, we explored the possibilities of additive-free electrospinning of pure fibroin nonwovens and tried to optimize process parameters to enable stable processing. We used natural silk derived from the mulberry silkworm Bombyx mori. After degumming, the silk fibroin was dissolved and the viscosity of the spinning solution was controlled by partial evaporation of the initial solving agent. This way, we were able to completely avoid the use of additives and manufacture nonwovens, which potentially offer higher biocompatibility and reduced immunogenicity. Temperature and relative humidity during electrospinning were systematically varied (25-35 °C, 25-30% RH). In a second step, the nonwovens optionally underwent methanol treatment to initiate beta-sheet formation in order to increase structural integrity and strength. Comprehensive surface analysis on the different nonwovens was performed using scanning electron microscopy and supplemented by additional mechanical testing. Cytotoxicity was evaluated using BrdU-assay, XTT-assay, LDH-assay and live-dead staining. Our findings were, that an increase of temperature and relative humidity led to unequal fiber diameters and defective nonwovens. Resistance to penetration decreased accordingly. The most uniform fiber diameters of 998 ± 63 nm were obtained at 30 °C and 25% relative humidity, also showing the highest value for resistance to penetration (0.20 N). The according pure fibroin nonwoven also showed no signs of cytotoxicity. However, while the biological response showed statistical evidence, the material characteristics showed no statistically significant correlation to changes of the ambient conditions within the investigated ranges. We suggest that further experiments should explore additional ranges for temperature and humidity and further focus on the repeatability of material properties in dependency of suitable process windows.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32123778
doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.01.010
pii: S2452-199X(20)30010-4
pmc: PMC7036448
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
241-252Informations de copyright
© 2020 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co., Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have no conflict of interest.
Références
Int J Biol Macromol. 2013 Feb;53:88-92
pubmed: 23164753
Nanoscale Res Lett. 2012 Mar 06;7(1):170
pubmed: 22394697
Int J Biol Macromol. 2011 Mar 1;48(2):345-53
pubmed: 21182858
Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2013 Apr;65(4):457-70
pubmed: 23137786
Biomacromolecules. 2014 May 12;15(5):1762-7
pubmed: 24724905
Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2017 Apr 1;73:498-506
pubmed: 28183638
J Biomed Mater Res A. 2012 Dec;100(12):3287-95
pubmed: 22733605
Int J Biol Macromol. 2016 Jun;87:201-7
pubmed: 26905467
Biomaterials. 2009 Jun;30(17):3058-67
pubmed: 19233463
ACS Omega. 2018 Jan 31;3(1):406-413
pubmed: 30023780
Biomed Mater. 2009 Oct;4(5):055010
pubmed: 19815970
J Nanosci Nanotechnol. 2016 Jun;16(6):5498-505
pubmed: 27427589
Int J Biol Macromol. 2012 Dec;51(5):980-6
pubmed: 22935694
Int J Mol Sci. 2009 Mar 31;10(4):1514-24
pubmed: 19468322
Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2019 May;98:969-981
pubmed: 30813104
Biotechnol Lett. 2008 Mar;30(3):405-10
pubmed: 17973083
J Biomater Appl. 2016 May;30(10):1552-65
pubmed: 27059497
Biomaterials. 2008 Aug-Sep;29(24-25):3415-28
pubmed: 18502501
Int J Biol Macromol. 2007 Aug 1;41(3):346-53
pubmed: 17573107
Bioengineering (Basel). 2018 Aug 21;5(3):
pubmed: 30134543
J Biomed Mater Res A. 2018 Apr;106(4):985-996
pubmed: 29143442
Biotechnol Adv. 2015 Dec;33(8):1855-67
pubmed: 26523781
Int J Biol Macromol. 2009 Dec 1;45(5):504-10
pubmed: 19772871
Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2016 Oct 1;67:599-610
pubmed: 27287159
Biomacromolecules. 2014 Apr 14;15(4):1288-98
pubmed: 24661009
Int J Biol Macromol. 2010 Nov 1;47(4):514-9
pubmed: 20688101