, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 749–761 | Cite as

Cellulose based thin films as a platform for drug release studies to mimick wound dressing materials

  • Tina Maver
  • Uroš MaverEmail author
  • Florian Mostegel
  • Thomas Griesser
  • Stefan SpirkEmail author
  • Dragica Maja Smrke
  • Karin Stana-Kleinschek
Original Paper


In this paper, the use of ultrathin cellulose supports as platform for the incorporation of analgesic drugs in wound dressings is proposed. As a model drug, diclofenac (DCF) is chosen, which is commonly used in pain easing medical treatments. The DCF containing cellulose films are prepared by mixing solutions of trimethylsilyl cellulose (DSSi:2.5) with DCF dissolved in THF. After depositing the material on a solid surface by spin-coating, the films are subjected to vapor-phase hydrolysis using 3 M HCl in order to achieve regeneration of cellulose. The release of DCF from these films over time is studied by UV–Vis. Upon deposition of additional layers of cellulose that do not contain DCF, the release from these films can be decelerated significantly. The release kinetics from these films is very similar to those of viscose fibers impregnated with DCF solutions. These studies indicate a potential use of cellulose thin films as model platform for viscose based wound dressings.


Cellulose Model platform Wound dressings TMSC Diclofenac Release studies 



The paper was co-produced within the framework of the operation entitled “Centre of Open innovation and ResEarch UM (CORE@UM)”. The operation is co-funded by the European Regional Development Fund and conducted within the framework of the Operational Programme for Strengthening Regional Development Potentials for the period 2007–2013, development priority 1: “Competitiveness of companies and research excellence”, priority axis 1.1: “Encouraging competitive potential of enterprises and research excellence”, contact No. 3330-13-500032. The authors acknowledge the financial support from the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology of the Republic of Slovenia and thank the Christian Doppler research association and the Austrian Ministry of Economics, Family and Youth (BMWFJ) for financial support.

Conflict of interest


Supplementary material

10570_2014_515_MOESM1_ESM.docx (371 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 370 kb)


  1. Alessandri F, Lijoi D, Mistrangelo E, Nicoletti A, Crosa M, Ragni N (2006) Topical diclofenac patch for postoperative wound pain in laparoscopic gynecologic surgery: a randomized study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 13(3):195–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell C, McCarthy G (2010) The assessment and treatment of wound pain at dressing change. Br J Nurs 19(11):S4–S8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benbow M (2010) Managing wound pain: is there an ‘ideal dressing’? Br J Nurs 19(20):1273–1274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Czaja WK, Young DJ, Kawecki M, Brown RM (2006) The future prospects of microbial cellulose in biomedical applications. Biomacromolecules 8(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davies SL, White RJ (2011) Defining a holistic pain-relieving approach to wound care via a drug free polymeric membrane dressing. J Wound Care 20(5):250–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Djak M, Gilli E, Kontturi E, Schennach R (2011) Thickness dependence of reflection—absorption infrared spectra of supported thin polymer films. Macromolecules 44(7):1775–1778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gantwerker EA, Hom DB (2012) Skin: histology and physiology of wound healing. Clin Plast Surg 39(1):85–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gaufberg SV, Walta MJ, Workman TP (2007) Expanding the use of topical anesthesia in wound management: sequential layered application of topical lidocaine with epinephrine. Am J Emerg Med 25(4):379–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hoeger IC, Filpponen I, Martin-Sampedro R, Johansson L-S, Österberg M, Laine J, Kelley S, Rojas OJ (2012) Bicomponent lignocellulose thin films to study the role of surface lignin in cellulolytic reactions. Biomacromolecules 13(10):3228–3240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hurlow J, Bowler PG (2009) Clinical experience with wound biofilm and management: a case series. Ostomy Wound Manage 55(4):38–49Google Scholar
  11. Jorgensen B, Friis GJ, Gottrup F (2006) Pain and quality of life for patients with venous leg ulcers: proof of concept of the efficacy of Biatain-Ibu, a new pain reducing wound dressing. Wound Repair Regen 14(3):233–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jurgens C, Porte T, Wolter D, Schmidt HGK, Kricheldorf HR, Kreisersaunders I (1995) Design and physicochemical properties of a new biodegradable wound dressing. Unfallchirurg 98(4):233–240Google Scholar
  13. Kitchener T (2010) Wound care and pain assessment. Nurs Stand 24(24):51Google Scholar
  14. Klode J, Schottler L, Stoffels I, Korber A, Schadendorf D, Dissemond J (2011) Investigation of adhesion of modern wound dressings: a comparative analysis of 56 different wound dressings. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 25(8):933–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kontturi E, Lankinen A (2010) Following the kinetics of a chemical reaction in ultrathin supported polymer films by reliable mass density determination with x-ray reflectivity. J Am Chem Soc 132(11):3678–3679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kontturi E, Thune PC, Niemantsverdriet JW (2003a) Novel method for preparing cellulose model surfaces by spin coating. Polymer 44(13):3621–3625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kontturi E, Thüne PC, Niemantsverdriet JW (2003b) Cellulose model surfacessimplified preparation by spin coating and characterization by x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, infrared spectroscopy, and atomic force microscopy. Langmuir 19(14):5735–5741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kontturi E, Thüne PC, Niemantsverdriet JW (2005) Trimethylsilylcellulose/polystyrene blends as a means to construct cellulose domains on cellulose. Macromolecules 38(26):10712–10720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kontturi E, Suchy M, Penttilä P, Jean B, Pirkkalainen K, Torkkeli M, Serimaa R (2011) Amorphous characteristics of an ultrathin cellulose film. Biomacromolecules 12(3):770–777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mohan T, Kargl R, Doliska A, Vesel A, Kostler S, Ribitsch V, Stana-Kleinschek K (2011) Wettability and surface composition of partly and fully regenerated cellulose thin films from trimethylsilyl cellulose. J Colloid Interface Sci 358(2):604–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mohan T, Spirk S, Kargl R, Doliska A, Vesel A, Salzmann I, Resel R, Ribitsch V, Stana-Kleinschek K (2012) Exploring the rearrangement of amorphous cellulose model thin films upon heat treatment. Soft Matter 8(38):9807–9815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nyfors L, Suchy M, Laine J, Kontturi E (2009) Ultrathin cellulose films of tunable nanostructured morphology with a hydrophobic component. Biomacromolecules 10(5):1276–1281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Patton ML, Mullins RF, Smith D, Korentager R (2013) An open, prospective, randomized pilot investigation evaluating pain with the use of a soft silicone wound contact layer vs bridal veil and staples on split thickness skin grafts as a primary dressing. J Burn Care Res 34(6):674–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Peršin Z, Maver U, Pivec T, Maver T, Vesel A, Mozetič M, Stana-Kleinschek K (2014) Novel cellulose based materials for safe and efficient wound treatment. Carbohydr Polym 100:55–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Petrulyte S (2008) Advanced textile materials and biopolymers in wound management. Dan Med Bull 55(1):72–77Google Scholar
  26. Pivec T, Peršin Z, Kolar M, Maver T, Dobaj A, Vesel A, Maver U, Stana-Kleinschek K (2013) Modification of cellulose non-woven substrates for preparation of modern wound dressings. Text Res J 84(1):96–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Richetta AG, Cantisani C, Li VW, Mattozzi C, Melis L, De Gado F, Giancristoforo S, Silvestri E, Calvieri S (2011) Hydrofiber dressing and wound repair: review of the literature and new patents. Recent Pat Inflamm Allergy Drug Discov 5(2):150–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Romanelli M, Dini V, Polignano R, Bonadeo P, Maggio G (2009) Ibuprofen slow-release foam dressing reduces wound pain in painful exuding wounds: preliminary findings from an international real-life study. J Dermatol Treatment 20(1):19–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Solowiej K, Mason V, Upton D (2010) Psychological stress and pain in wound care, part 3: management. J Wound Care 19(4):153–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Stana-Kleinschek K, Persin Z, Maver T (2011) Modification of non-woven cellulose for medical applications using non-equlibrium gas sious plasma. Mater Tehnol 45(3):253–257Google Scholar
  31. Thomas S (2008) A review of the physical, biological and clinical properties of a bacterial cellulose wound dressing. J Wound Care 17(8):349–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ukmar T, Maver U, Planinšek O, Kaučič V, Gaberšček M, Godec A (2011) Understanding controlled drug release from mesoporous silicates: theory and experiment. J Control Release 155(3):409–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ukmar T, Maver U, Planinšek O, Pintar A, Kaučič V, Godec A, Gaberšček M (2012) Guest-host van der Waals interactions decisively affect the molecular transport in mesoporous media. J Mater Chem 22(3):1112–1120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. White R (2011) Wound dressings and other topical treatment modalities in bioburden control. J Wound Care 20(9):431–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Widgerow AD (2011) Chronic wound fluid—thinking outside the box. Wound Repair Regen 19(3):287–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. World Wound Care Markets 2011. (2011) Kalorama.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tina Maver
    • 1
  • Uroš Maver
    • 2
    Email author
  • Florian Mostegel
    • 3
  • Thomas Griesser
    • 3
  • Stefan Spirk
    • 1
    • 4
    Email author
  • Dragica Maja Smrke
    • 5
  • Karin Stana-Kleinschek
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory for Characterisation and Processing of Polymers, Faculty of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of MariborMariborSlovenia
  2. 2.Faculty of MedicineUniversity of MariborMariborSlovenia
  3. 3.Christian Doppler Laboratory for Functional and Polymer Based Ink-Jet Inks and Chair of Chemistry of Polymeric MaterialsUniversity of LeobenLeobenAustria
  4. 4.Institute for Chemistry and Technology of MaterialsGraz University of TechnologyGrazAustria
  5. 5.University Medical Centre LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations