Chitosan-based electrospun nanofibrous mats, hydrogels and cast films: novel anti-bacterial wound dressing matrices

  • Sohail Shahzad
  • Muhammad YarEmail author
  • Saadat Anwar Siddiqi
  • Nasir Mahmood
  • Abdul Rauf
  • Zafar-ul-Ahsan Qureshi
  • Muhammad Sabieh Anwar
  • Shahida Afzaal
Delivery Systems
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Delivery Systems


The development of highly efficient anti-bacterial wound dressings was carried out. For this purpose nanofibrous mats, hydrogels and films were synthesized from chitosan, poly(vinyl alcohol) and hydroxyapatite. The physical/chemical interactions of the synthesized materials were evaluated by FTIR. The morphology, structure; average diameter and pore size of the materials were investigated by scanning electron microscopy. The hydrogels showed a greater degree of swelling as compared to nanofibrous mats and films in phosphate buffer saline solution of pH 7.4. The in vitro drug release studies showed a burst release during the initial period of 4 h and then a sustained release profile was observed in the next upcoming 20 h. The lyophilized hydrogels showed a more slow release as compared to nanofibrous mats and films. Antibacterial potential of drug released solutions collected after 24 h of time interval was determined and all composite matrices showed good to moderate activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacterial strains respectively. To determine the cytotoxicity, cell culture was performed for various cefixime loaded substrates by using neutral red dye uptake assay and all the matrices were found to be non-toxic.


Chitosan Drug Release Cefixime Composite Matrice Cast Film 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We acknowledge Higher Education Commission and Ministry of Science and Technology Pakistan for financial support. We would like to thank Mohsin at UHS for his help in this work.


  1. 1.
    Song A, Rane AA, Christman KL. Antibacterial and cell-adhesive polypeptide and poly (ethylene glycol) hydrogel as a potential scaffold for wound healing. Acta Biomater. 2012;8:41–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lagana G, Anderson EH. Moisture dressings: the new standard in wound care. J Nurse Pract. 2010;6:366–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pal K, Banthia AK, Majumdar DK. Polyvinyl alcohol–glycine composite membranes: preparation, characterization, drug release and cytocompatibility studies. Biomed Mater. 2006;1:49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yu H, Xu X, Chen X, Hao J, Jing X. Medicated wound dressings based on poly (vinyl alcohol)/poly (N-vinyl pyrrolidone)/chitosan hydrogels. J Appl Polym Sci. 2006;101:2453–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Majno G. The healing hand: man and wound in the ancient world. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1991.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boateng JS, Pawar HV, Tetteh J. Polyox and carrageenan based composite film dressing containing anti-microbial and anti-inflammatory drugs for effective wound healing. Int J Pharm. 2013;441:181–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fajardo AR, Lopes LC, Caleare AO, Britta EA, Nakamura CV, Rubira AF, et al. Silver sulfadiazine loaded chitosan/chondroitin sulfate films for a potential wound dressing application. Mater Sci Eng C. 2013;33:588–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pawar H, Tetteh J, Boateng J. Preparation, optimisation and characterisation of novel wound healing film dressings loaded with streptomycin and diclofenac. Colloids Surf B. 2013;102:102–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Thu H-E, Zulfakar MH, Ng S-F. Alginate based bilayer hydrocolloid films as potential slow-release modern wound dressing. Int J Pharm. 2012;434:375–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    De Cicco F, Reverchon E, Adami R, Auriemma G, Russo P, Calabrese EC, et al. In situ forming antibacterial dextran blend hydrogel for wound dressing: SAA technology vs. spray drying. Carbohydr Polym. 2014;101:1216–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dias A, Braga M, Seabra I, Ferreira P, Gil M, De Sousa H. Development of natural-based wound dressings impregnated with bioactive compounds and using supercritical carbon dioxide. Int J Pharm. 2011;408:9–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Singh B, Pal L. Sterculia crosslinked PVA and PVA-poly (AAm) hydrogel wound dressings for slow drug delivery: mechanical, mucoadhesive, biocompatible and permeability properties. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2012;9:9–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang T, Zhu X-K, Xue X-T, Wu D-Y. Hydrogel sheets of chitosan, honey and gelatin as burn wound dressings. Carbohydr Polym. 2012;88:75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shalumon K, Anulekha K, Nair SV, Nair S, Chennazhi K, Jayakumar R. Sodium alginate/poly(vinyl alcohol)/nano ZnO composite nanofibers for antibacterial wound dressings. Int J Biol Macromol. 2011;49:247–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Unnithan AR, Barakat NA, Tirupathi Pichiah P, Gnanasekaran G, Nirmala R, Cha Y-S, et al. Wound-dressing materials with antibacterial activity from electrospun polyurethane–dextran nanofiber mats containing ciprofloxacin HCl. Carbohydr Polym. 2012;90:1786–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yang Y, Xia T, Zhi W, Wei L, Weng J, Zhang C, et al. Promotion of skin regeneration in diabetic rats by electrospun core-sheath fibers loaded with basic fibroblast growth factor. Biomaterials. 2011;32:4243–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhao Y, Zhou Y, Wu X, Wang L, Xu L, Wei S. A facile method for electrospinning of Ag nanoparticles/poly (vinyl alcohol)/carboxymethyl-chitosan nanofibers. Appl Surf Sci. 2012;258:8867–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kenawy E-R, Layman JM, Watkins JR, Bowlin GL, Matthews JA, Simpson DG, et al. Electrospinning of poly (ethylene-co-vinyl alcohol) fibers. Biomaterials. 2003;24:907–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Khil MS, Cha DI, Kim HY, Kim IS, Bhattarai N. Electrospun nanofibrous polyurethane membrane as wound dressing. J Biomed Mater Res B. 2003;67:675–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Matsumoto H, Tanioka A. Functionality in electrospun nanofibrous membranes based on fiber’s size, surface area, and molecular orientation. Membranes. 2011;1:249–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Li C, Vepari C, Jin H-J, Kim HJ, Kaplan DL. Electrospun silk-BMP-2 scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials. 2006;27:3115–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schneider A, Wang X, Kaplan D, Garlick J, Egles C. Biofunctionalized electrospun silk mats as a topical bioactive dressing for accelerated wound healing. Acta Biomater. 2009;5:2570–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Reneker DH, Yarin AL, Fong H, Koombhongse S. Bending instability of electrically charged liquid jets of polymer solutions in electrospinning. J Appl Phys. 2000;87:4531–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Haque MA, Kurokawa T, Gong JP. Super tough double network hydrogels and their application as biomaterials. Polymer. 2012;53:1805–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ryu JH, Lee Y, Kong WH, Kim TG, Park TG, Lee H. Catechol-functionalized chitosan/pluronic hydrogels for tissue adhesives and hemostatic materials. Biomacromolecules. 2011;12:2653–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zhang H, Qadeer A, Chen W. In situ gelable interpenetrating double network hydrogel formulated from binary components: thiolated chitosan and oxidized dextran. Biomacromolecules. 2011;12:1428–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kao WJ. Evaluation of protein-modulated macrophage behavior on biomaterials: designing biomimetic materials for cellular engineering. Biomaterials. 1999;20:2213–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ruszczak Z. Effect of collagen matrices on dermal wound healing. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2003;55:1595–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cho Y-W, Han S-S, Ko S-W. PVA containing chito-oligosaccharide side chain. Polymer. 2000;41:2033–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kim SJ, Shin SR, Kim NG, Kim SI. Swelling behavior of semi-interpenetrating polymer network hydrogels based on chitosan and poly(acryl amide). J Macromol Sci A. 2005;42:1073–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Liang S, Liu L, Huang Q, Yam KL. Preparation of single or double-network chitosan/poly (vinyl alcohol) gel films through selectively cross-linking method. Carbohydr Polym. 2009;77:718–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yang E, Qin X, Wang S. Electrospun crosslinked polyvinyl alcohol membrane. Mater Lett. 2008;62:3555–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chandy T, Sharma CP. Prostaglandin E1-immobilized poly (vinyl alcohol)-blended chitosan membranes: blood compatibility and permeability properties. J Appl Polym Sci. 1992;44:2145–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jegal J, Lee KH. Nanofiltration membranes based on poly (vinyl alcohol) and ionic polymers. J Appl Polym Sci. 1999;72:1755–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sarvestani AS, Jabbari E. Modeling and experimental investigation of rheological properties of injectable poly (lactide ethylene oxide fumarate)/hydroxyapatite nanocomposites. Biomacromolecules. 2006;7:1573–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sugawara A, Yamane S, Akiyoshi K. Nanogel-templated mineralization: polymer-calcium phosphate hybrid nanomaterials. Macromol Rapid Commun. 2006;27:441–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sung Y-M, Shin Y-K, Ryu J-J. Preparation of hydroxyapatite/zirconia bioceramic nanocomposites for orthopaedic and dental prosthesis applications. Nanotechnology. 2007;18:065602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gomez-Vega J, Saiz E, Tomsia A, Marshall G, Marshall S. Bioactive glass coatings with hydroxyapatite and Bioglass particles on Ti-based implants. 1. Processing. Biomaterials. 2000;21:105–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Rizzi SC, Heath D, Coombes A, Bock N, Textor M, Downes S. Biodegradable polymer/hydroxyapatite composites: surface analysis and initial attachment of human osteoblasts. J Biomed Mater Res. 2001;55:475–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lin HR, Yeh YJ. Porous alginate/hydroxyapatite composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: preparation, characterization, and in vitro studies. J Biomed Mater Res B. 2004;71:52–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Queiroz A, Santos JD, Monteiro F. Adsorption isotherm of sodium ampicillin onto dense and porous hydroxyapatite. Key Eng Mater. 2005;284:387–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rauschmann MA, Wichelhaus TA, Stirnal V, Dingeldein E, Zichner L, Schnettler R, et al. Nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite and calcium sulphate as biodegradable composite carrier material for local delivery of antibiotics in bone infections. Biomaterials. 2005;26:2677–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Santos JD, Monteiro F, Queiroz A. Porous HA scaffolds for drug releasing. Key Eng Mater. 2005;284:407–10.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Arshad HM, Mohiuddin OA, Azmi MB. Comparative in vitro antibacterial analysis of different brands of cefixime against clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli. J Appl Pharm Sci. 2012;2:109–13.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bergeron MG, Turcotte A. Penetration of cefixime into fibrin clots and in vivo efficacy against Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1986;30:913–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Knapp CC, Sierra-Madero J, Washington JA. Antibacterial activities of cefpodoxime, cefixime, and ceftriaxone. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1988;32:1896–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sweetman SC. Martindale: the complete drug reference. 35th ed. London: Pharmaceutical Press; 2007.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    McMillan A, Young H. The treatment of pharyngeal gonorrhoea with a single oral dose of cefixime. Int J STD AIDS. 2007;18:253–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Huang M, Zhao X-L. Pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of oral cefiximein healthy adult volunteers. Chin Pharmacol Bull. 1994:01.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Murtaza G, Ahmad M, Khan SA, Hussain I. Evaluation of cefixime-loaded chitosan microspheres: analysis of dissolution data using DDSolver. Dissolut Technol. 2012;19:13–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Reddy AT, Kiran JV, Duraival S, Pragathi Kumar B. Formulation and in-vitro evaluation of cefixime trihydrate sustained release matrix tablets. Int J Curr Pharm Rev Res. 2013;3:110–29.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Repetto G, del Peso A, Zurita JL. Neutral red uptake assay for the estimation of cell viability/cytotoxicity. Nat Protoc. 2008;3:1125–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sohail Shahzad
    • 1
  • Muhammad Yar
    • 2
    Email author
  • Saadat Anwar Siddiqi
    • 2
  • Nasir Mahmood
    • 3
    • 4
  • Abdul Rauf
    • 1
  • Zafar-ul-Ahsan Qureshi
    • 5
  • Muhammad Sabieh Anwar
    • 6
  • Shahida Afzaal
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryThe Islamia University of BahawalpurBahawalpurPakistan
  2. 2.Interdisciplinary Research Center in Biomedical MaterialsCOMSATS Institute of Information TechnologyLahorePakistan
  3. 3.Department of Allied Health Sciences and Chemical PathologyUniversity of Health SciencesLahorePakistan
  4. 4.Department of Human Genetics and Molecular BiologyUniversity of Health SciencesLahorePakistan
  5. 5.Veterinary Research InstituteLahorePakistan
  6. 6.Department of Physics, Syed Babar Ali School of Science and EngineeringLahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS)LahorePakistan

Personalised recommendations