Advertisement

Biodegradable Polymer-Based Nanohybrids for Controlled Drug Delivery and Implant Applications

  • Aparna Shukla
  • Pralay MaitiEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Materials Horizons: From Nature to Nanomaterials book series (MHFNN)

Abstract

This chapter describes the importance and applications of different biodegradable and biocompatible polymers as a control drug delivery vehicles used in tissue engineering. Here, different types of biopolymers with their properties are described by taking various examples. The use of different types of fillers for the synthesis of polymer composites and their drug delivery has been discussed. The advantages of biodegradable polymer nanohybrids in drug delivery are the major concerns in this chapter. The addition of fillers in the biodegradable polymeric matrices is discussed, and a comparison is made with pure polymer. The applications of polymer nanohybrids in different fields are discussed in detail especially in biomedical fields. Further, drug delivery and implants materials are summarized for biomedical applications using various composites.

Keywords

Biodegradable polymer Nanohybrids Drug delivery Implant 

References

  1. 1.
    Bang DY, Kyung M, Kim MJ, Jung BY, Cho MC, Choi SM, Kwack SJ (2012) Human risk assessment of endocrine-disrupting chemicals derived from plastic food containers. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 11:453–470.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-4337.2012.00197.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chanprateep S (2010) Current trends in biodegradable polyhydroxyalkanoates. J Biosci Bioeng 110:621–632.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiosc.2010.07.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wu Y, Wang G, Wang Z, Liu Y, Gu P, Sun D (2014) Comparative study on the efficiency and environmental impact of two methods of utilizing polyvinyl chloride waste based on life cycle assessments. Front Environ Sci Eng 8:451–462.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-013-0614-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lambert S, Sinclair C, Boxall A (2014) Occurrence, degradation, and effect of polymer-based materials in the environment. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol 227:1–53.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01327-5_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eriksson O, Finnveden G (2009) Plastic waste as a fuel-CO2-neutral or not? Energy Environ Sci 2:907–914.  https://doi.org/10.1039/B908135FCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Funabashi M, Ninomiya F, Kunioka M (2009) Biodegradability evaluation of polymers by ISO 14855-2. Int J Mol Sci 10:3635–3654.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms10083635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lucas N, Bienaime C, Belloy C, Queneudec M, Silvestre F, Nava-Saucedo JE (2008) Polymer biodegradation: mechanisms and estimation techniques—a review. Chemosphere 73:429–442.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2008.06.064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Iwata T (2015) Biodegradable and bio-based polymers: future prospects of eco-friendly plastics. Angew Chem Int Ed 54:3210–3215.  https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201410770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nair LS, Laurencin CT (2007) Biodegradable polymers as biomaterials. Prog Polym Sci 32:762–798.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2007.05.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    John RP, Nampoothiri KM, Pandey A (2006) Solid-state fermentation for l-lactic acid production from agro wastes using Lactobacillus delbrueckii. Process Biochem 41:759–763.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2005.09.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kumar AP, Depan D, Tomer NS, Singh RP (2009) Nanoscale particles for polymer degradation and stabilization—trends and future perspectives. Prog Polym Sci 34:479–515.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2009.01.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kurkov SV, Loftsson T (2013) Cyclodextrins. Int J Pharm 453:167–180.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2012.06.055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Concheiro A, Alvarez-Lorenzo C (2013) Chemically cross-linked and grafted cyclodextrin hydrogels: from nanostructures to drug-eluting medical devices. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 65:1188–1203.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2013.04.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kulkarni A, DeFrees K, Hyun SH, Thompson DH (2012) Pendant polymer: amino-β-Cyclodextrin:siRNA guest: host nanoparticles as efficient vectors for gene silencing. J Am Chem Soc 134:7596–7599.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ja300690jCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Li JJ, Zhao F, Li J (2011) Polyrotaxanes for applications in life science and biotechnology. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 90:427–443.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-010-3037-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shukla A, Singh AP, Ray B, Aswal V, Kar AG, Maiti P (2019) Efficacy of polyurethane graft on cyclodextrin to control drug release for tumor treatment. J Colloid Interface Sci 534:215–227.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2018.09.032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ulery BD, Nair LS, Laurencin CT (2011) Biomedical applications of biodegradable polymers. J Polym Sci B Polym Phys 49:832–864.  https://doi.org/10.1002/polb.22259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ren D, Yi H, Wang W, Ma X (2005) The enzymatic degradation and swelling properties of chitosan matrices with different degrees of N-acetylation. Carbohydr Res 340:2403–2410.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carres.2005.07.022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Li DH, Liu LM, Tian KL, Liu JC, Fan XQ (2007) Synthesis, biodegradability and cytotoxicity of water-soluble isobutylchitosan. Carbohydr Polym 67:40–45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2006.04.022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chen Z, Zhang L, Song Y, He J, Wu L, Zhao C, Li W (2015) Hierarchical targeted hepatocyte mitochondrial multifunctional chitosan nanoparticles for anticancer drug delivery. Biomaterials 52:240–250.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.02.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kogan G, Šoltés L, Stern R, Gemeiner P (2007) Hyaluronic acid: a natural biopolymer with a broad range of biomedical and industrial applications. Biotechnol Lett 29:17–25.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10529-006-9219-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sudha PN, Rose MH (2014) Chapter nine—beneficial effects of hyaluronic acid. In: Kim S-K (ed) Advances in food and nutrition research. Academic Press, London, pp 137–176Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Laurent TC, Fraser JR (1992) Hyaluronan. FASEB J 6:2397–2404.  https://doi.org/10.1096/fasebj.6.7.1563592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Li F, Yu D, Lin X, Liu D, Xia H, Chen S (2012) Biodegradation of poly(ε-caprolactone) (PCL) by a new Penicillium oxalicum strain DSYD05-1. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 28:2929–2935.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-012-1103-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kamaly N, Yameen B, Wu J, Farokhzad OC (2016) Degradable controlled-release polymers and polymeric nanoparticles: mechanisms of controlling drug release. Chem Rev 116:2602–2663.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dash TK, Konkimalla VB (2012) Polymeric modification and its implication in drug delivery: poly-ε-caprolactone (PCL) as a model polymer. Mol Pharm 9:2365–2379.  https://doi.org/10.1021/mp3001952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li Z, Tan BH (2014) Towards the development of polycaprolactone based amphiphilic block copolymers: molecular design, self-assembly and biomedical applications. Mater Sci Eng C 45:620–634.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2014.06.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Allcock HR, Lampe FW, Mark JE, Allcock HR (1990) Contemporary polymer chemistry. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lensen D, van Breukelen K, Vriezema DM, van Hest JC (2010) Preparation of biodegradable liquid core PLLA microcapsules and hollow PLLA microcapsules using microfluidics. Macromol Biosci 10:475–480.  https://doi.org/10.1002/mabi.200900404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Leung L, Chan C, Baek S, Hani N (2008) Comparison of morphology and mechanical properties of PLGA bioscaffolds. Biomed Mater 3:025006.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-6041/3/2/025006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Seck TM, Melchels FP, Feijen J, Grijpma DW (2010) Designed biodegradable hydrogel structures prepared by stereolithography using poly(ethylene glycol)/poly(d, l-lactide)-based resins. J Control Release 148:34–41.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2010.07.111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Cai K, Yao K, Yang Z, Qu Y, Li X (2007) Histological study of surface modified three dimensional poly (d, l-lactic acid) scaffolds with chitosan in vivo. J Mater Sci Mater Med 18:2017–2024.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-007-3151-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Steinbach JM, Seo YE, Saltzman WM (2016) Cell penetrating peptide-modified poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) nanoparticles with enhanced cell internalization. Acta Biomater 30:49–61.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2015.11.029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Middleton JC, Tipton AJ (1998) Med Plastic Biomaterials 5:31–38Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gavenis K, Schneider U, Groll J, Schmidt-Rohlfing B (2010) BMP-7-loaded PGLA microspheres as a new delivery system for the cultivation of human chondrocytes in a collagen type I gel: the common nude mouse model. Int J Artif Organs 33:45–53.  https://doi.org/10.1177/039139881003300107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jiang W, Schwendeman SP (2008) Stabilization of tetanus toxoid encapsulated in PLGA microspheres. Mol Pharm 5:808–817.  https://doi.org/10.1021/mp800027fCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jeong YI, Na HS, Seo DH, Kim DG, Lee HC, Jang MK, Nah JW (2008) Ciprofloxacin-encapsulated poly(dl-lactide-co-glycolide) nanoparticles and its antibacterial activity. Int J Pharm 352:317–323.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2007.11.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tang Y, Singh J (2008) Controlled delivery of aspirin: effect of aspirin on polymer degradation and in vitro release from PLGA based phase sensitive systems. Int J Pharm 357:119–125.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2008.01.053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zolnik BS, Burgess DJ (2008) Evaluation of in vivo–in vitro release of dexamethasone from PLGA microspheres. J Control Release 127:137–145.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2008.01.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Dayananda K, He C, Park DK, Park TG, Lee DS (2008) pH- and temperature-sensitive multiblock copolymer hydrogels composed of poly(ethylene glycol) and poly(amino urethane). Polymer 49:4968–4973.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2008.09.033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wang F, Li Z, Lannutti JL, Wagner WR, Guan J (2009) Synthesis, characterization and surface modification of low moduli poly (ether carbonate urethane) ureas for soft tissue engineering. Acta Biomater 5:2901–2912.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2009.04.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Yu S, He C, Ding J, Cheng Y, Song W, Zhuang X, Chen X (2013) pH and reduction dual responsive polyurethane triblock copolymers for efficient intracellular drug delivery. Soft Matter 9:2637–2645.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c2sm27616jCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Biswas A, Aswal VK, Ray B, Maiti P (2018) Nanostructure controlled shape memory effect in polyurethanes. J Phys Chem C 122(20):11167–11176.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.8b02824CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Gu L, Wang X, Chen X, Zhao X, Wang F (2011) Thermal and pH responsive high molecular weight poly(urethane-amine) with high urethane content. J Polym Sci A Polym Chem 49:5162–5168.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pola.24981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Miyazu K, Kawahara D, Ohtake H, Watanabe G, Matsuda T (2010) Luminal surface design of electrospun small-diameter graft aiming at in situ capture of endothelial progenitor cell. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 94:53–63.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.31623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wu W, Zhu Q, Qing F, Han CC (2008) Water repellency on a fluorine-containing polyurethane surface: toward understanding the surface self-cleaning effect. Langmuir 25:17–20.  https://doi.org/10.1021/la803089yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Tang YW, Labow RS, Santerre JP (2001) Enzyme-induced biodegradation of polycarbonate polyurethanes: dependence on hard-segment concentration. J Biomed Mater Res 56:516–528.  https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4636(20010915)56:4%3c516:AID-JBM1123%3e3.0.CO;2-BCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Xu H, Chang J, Chen Y, Fan H, Shi B (2013) Asymmetric polyurethane membrane with inflammation-responsive antibacterial activity for potential wound dressing application. J Mater Sci 48:6625–6639.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-013-7461-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Lv S, Song W, Tang Z, Li M, Yu H, Hong H, Chen X (2014) Charge-conversional PEG-polypeptide polyionic complex nanoparticles from simple blending of a pair of oppositely charged block copolymers as an intelligent vehicle for efficient antitumor drug delivery. Mol Pharm 11:1562–1574.  https://doi.org/10.1021/mp4007387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ninawe PR, Parulekar SJ (2011) Drug delivery using stimuli-responsive polymer gel spheres. Ind Eng Chem Res 51:1741–1755.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ie200118yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Xia XX, Wang M, Lin Y, Xu Q, Kaplan DL (2014) Hydrophobic drug-triggered self-assembly of nanoparticles from silk-elastin-like protein polymers for drug delivery. Biomacromolecules 15:908–914.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm4017594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Frandsen JL, Ghandehari H (2012) Recombinant protein-based polymers for advanced drug delivery. Chem Soc Rev 41:2696–2706.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C2CS15303CCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Li Y, Maciel D, Rodrigues J, Shi X, Tomas H (2015) Biodegradable polymer nanogels for drug/nucleic acid delivery. Chem Rev 115:8564–8608.  https://doi.org/10.1021/cr500131fCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Grüll H, Langereis S (2012) Hyperthermia-triggered drug delivery from temperature-sensitive liposomes using MRI-guided high intensity focused ultrasound. J Control Release 161:317–327.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2012.04.041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Endres TK, Beck-Broichsitter M, Samsonova O, Renette T, Kissel TH (2011) Self-assembled biodegradable amphiphilic PEG–PCL–lPEI triblock copolymers at the borderline between micelles and nanoparticles designed for drug and gene delivery. Biomaterials 32:7721–7731.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.06.064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Medina SH, Tekumalla V, Chevliakov MV, Shewach DS, Ensminger WD, El-Sayed ME (2011) N-acetylgalactosamine-functionalized dendrimers as hepatic cancer cell-targeted carriers. Biomaterials 32:4118–4129.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.11.068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    O’driscoll CM, Griffin BT (2008) Biopharmaceutical challenges associated with drugs with low aqueous solubility—the potential impact of lipid-based formulations. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 60:617–624.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2007.10.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Tan JP, Wang Q, Tam KC (2008) Control of burst release from nanogels via layer by layer assembly. J Control Release 128:248–254.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2008.03.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Astashkina A, Mann B, Grainger DW (2012) A critical evaluation of in vitro cell culture models for high-throughput drug screening and toxicity. Pharmacol Ther 134:82–106.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pharmthera.2012.01.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Martín Del Valle EM, Galán MA, Carbonell RG (2009) Drug delivery technologies: the way forward in the new decade. Ind Eng Chem Res 48:2475–2486.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ie800886mCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Colthurst MJ, Williams RL, Hiscott PS, Grierson I (2000) Biomaterials used in the posterior segment of the eye. Biomaterials 21:649–665.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(99)00220-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Li Y, Rodrigues J, Tomas H (2012) Injectable and biodegradable hydrogels: gelation, biodegradation and biomedical applications. Chem Soc Rev 41:2193–2221.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C1CS15203CCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Jha AK, Xu X, Duncan RL, Jia X (2011) Controlling the adhesion and differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells using hyaluronic acid-based, doubly crosslinked networks. Biomaterials 32:2466–2478.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.12.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Pandey SK, Patel DK, Thakur R, Mishra DP, Maiti P, Haldar C (2015) Anti-cancer evaluation of quercetin embedded PLA nanoparticles synthesized by emulsified nanoprecipitation. Int J Biol Macromol 75:521–529.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2015.02.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Park SJ, Lee YJ, Heo DN, Kwon IK, Yun KS, Kang JY, Lee SH (2015) Functional nerve cuff electrode with controllable anti-inflammatory drug loading and release by biodegradable nanofibers and hydrogel deposition. Sens Actuators B Chem 215:133–141.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2015.03.036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Singh NK, Singh SK, Dash D, Purkayastha BPD, Roy JK, Maiti P (2012) Nanostructure controlled anti-cancer drug delivery using poly (ε-caprolactone) based nanohybrids. J Mater Chem 22:17853–17863.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C2JM32340KCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Carsten Christophersen P, Fano M, Saaby L, Yang M, Mørck Nielsen H, Mu H (2015) Characterization of particulate drug delivery systems for oral delivery of peptide and protein drugs. Curr Pharm Des 21:2611–2628.  https://doi.org/10.2174/1381612821666150416100943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Damgé C, Maincent P, Ubrich N (2007) Oral delivery of insulin associated to polymeric nanoparticles in diabetic rats. J Control Release 117:163–170.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2006.10.023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Tan J, Meng N, Fan Y, Su Y, Zhang M, Xiao Y, Zhou N (2016) Hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin–graphene oxide conjugates: carriers for anti-cancer drugs. Mater Sci Eng C 61:681–687.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2015.12.098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Claveria-Gimeno R, Vega S, Grazu V, de la Fuente JM, Lanas A, Velazquez-Campoy A, Abian O (2015) Rescuing compound bioactivity in a secondary cell-based screening by using γ-cyclodextrin as a molecular carrier. Int J Nanomedicine 10:2249–2259.  https://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S79480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Correia A, Shahbazi MA, Mäkilä E, Almeida S, Salonen J, Hirvonen J, Santos HA (2015) Cyclodextrin-modified porous silicon nanoparticles for efficient sustained drug delivery and proliferation inhibition of breast cancer cells. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 7:23197–23204.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.5b07033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Siriviriyanun A, Popova M, Imae T, Kiew LV, Looi CY, Wong WF, Chung LY (2015) Preparation of graphene oxide/dendrimer hybrid carriers for delivery of doxorubicin. Chem Eng J 281:771–781.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2015.07.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Safari M, Ghiaci M, Jafari-Asl M, Ensafi AA (2015) Nanohybrid organic–inorganic chitosan/dopamine/TiO2 composites with controlled drug-delivery properties. Appl Surf Sci 342:26–33.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2015.03.028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Leyla S, Li Y, Marcus B, Kim C, Ramazan A (2017) Structural and biological properties of thermosensitive chitosan–graphene hybrid hydrogels for sustained drug delivery applications. J Biomed Mater Res A 105:2381–2390.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.36096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Patel DK, Senapati S, Mourya P, Singh MM, Aswal VK, Ray B, Maiti P (2017) Functionalized graphene tagged polyurethanes for corrosion inhibitor and sustained drug delivery. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 3:3351–3363.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.7b00342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Mishra A, Singh SK, Dash D, Aswal VK, Maiti B, Misra M, Maiti P (2014) Self-assembled aliphatic chain extended polyurethane nanobiohybrids: emerging hemocompatible biomaterials for sustained drug delivery. Acta Biomater 10:2133–2146.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2013.12.035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Gorrasi G, Vittoria V, Murariu M, Ferreira ADS, Alexandre M, Dubois P (2008) Effect of filler content and size on transport properties of water vapor in PLA/calcium sulfate composites. Biomacromolecules 9:984–990.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm700568nCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Shalak R, FOX C (1988) Tissue engineering proceedings: workshop held at Granlibakken. Lake Tahoe, California, February, pp 26–29Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Bolland BJRF, Kanczler JM, Ginty PJ, Howdle SM, Shakesheff KM, Dunlop DG, Oreffo ROC (2008) The application of human bone marrow stromal cells and poly(dl-lactic acid) as a biological bone graft extender in impaction bone grafting. Biomaterials 29:3221–3227.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.04.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Mahanta AK, Senapati S, Maiti P (2017) A polyurethane–chitosan brush as an injectable hydrogel for controlled drug delivery and tissue engineering. Polym Chem 8:6233–6249.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C7PY01218GCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Dias RCM, Góes AM, Serakides R, Ayres E, Oréfice RL (2010) Porous biodegradable polyurethane nanocomposites: preparation, characterization, and biocompatibility tests. Mater Res 13:211–218.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-14392010000200015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Yang J, Lv J, Gao B, Zhang L, Yang D, Shi C, Feng Y (2014) Modification of polycarbonateurethane surface with poly (ethylene glycol) monoacrylate and phosphorylcholine glyceraldehyde for anti-platelet adhesion. Front Chem Sci Eng 8:188–196.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11705-014-1414-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Kannan RY, Salacinski HJ, Ghanavi JE, Narula A, Odlyha M, Peirovi H, Seifalian AM (2007) Silsesquioxane nanocomposites as tissue implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 119:1653–1662.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000246404.53831.4cCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Tyler B, Gullotti D, Mangraviti A, Utsuki T, Brem H (2016) Polylactic acid (PLA) controlled delivery carriers for biomedical applications. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 107:163–175.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2016.06.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Thomas NG, Sanil GP, Rajmohan G, Prabhakaran JV, Panda AK (2011) Fabrication and anti-microbial evaluation of drug loaded polylactide space filler intended for ridge preservation following tooth extraction. J Indian Soc Periodontol 15:260.  https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-124X.85671CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Materials Science and TechnologyIndian Institute of Technology (BHU)VaranasiIndia

Personalised recommendations