Advertisement

Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 53, Issue 12, pp 9325–9339 | Cite as

An in situ silicone–silicone interpenetrating polymer network (IPN) with higher mechanical property, higher hydrophilicity, and lower protein adsorption

  • Yang Xie
  • Li Wang
  • Yan Zhang
  • Houbin Li
  • Ronghua Huang
Polymers

Abstract

As medical materials, silicone polymers are poor in mechanical properties and in resistance to fouling for its non-specific adsorption of proteins, cells, etc. This paper introduces a new type of silicone–silicone interpenetrating polymer network (IPN) composing of two curing reactions: One was radical coupled reaction, and the other was ring opening of epoxy by amino groups. The IPN were characterized by Fourier transform IR spectroscopy (FT-IR), dynamic mechanical analysis, cross section scanning electron microscope, and mechanical property. IPN structure could be formed in a co-continuous phase, while the sea–island phase could be also found up to amino content, and then tear strength and elongation at break were obviously increased. ATR FT-IR, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, and static water contact angles confirmed that IPN surfaces showed the hydrophilicity dependent on surface amino-epoxy component. The static water contact angles were greatly decreased to the lowest 69.3°. Both qualitative and quantitative bovine serum albumin (BSA) adsorption assay confirmed that, compared with pure polydimethylsiloxane, BSA adsorption on IPN substrates were greatly decreased, with the most 85%.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Gu QG, Zhou QL (1998) Preparation of high strength and optically transparent silicone rubber. Eur Polym J 34:1727–1733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zheng P, Mccarthy TJ (2010) Rediscovering silicones: molecularly smooth, low surface energy, unfilled, UV/vis-transparent, extremely cross-linked, thermally stable, hard, elastic PDMS. Langmuir 26:18585–18590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cordeiro AL, Zschoche S, Janke A, Nitschke M, Werner C (2009) Functionalization of poly(dimethylsiloxane) surfaces with maleic anhydride copolymer films. Langmuir 25:1509–1517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chekina NA, Pavlyuchenko VN, Danilichev VF, Ushakov NA, Novikov SA, Ivanchev SS (2006) A new polymeric silicone hydrogel for medical applications: synthesis and properties. Polym Adv Technol 17:872–877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chu PK, Chen JY, Wang LP, Huang N (2002) Plasma surface modification of biomaterials. Mater Sci Eng R 36:143–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yeh SB, Chen CS, Chen WY, Huang CJ (2014) Modification of silicone elastomer with zwitterionic silane for durable antifouling properties. Langmuir 30:11386–11393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nabarun R, Tuli D, Subhas CK, Anil KB (2013) Biocompatible composites of fibrous nanohydroxyapatite embedded in a polydimethylsiloxane. J Mater Sci 48:5132–5139.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-013-7298-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ganachaud DF, Boileau DS, Boury PB (2008) Silicon. based. polym. Springer, Dordrecht, Paris, pp 19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Turner JS, Cheng YL (2000) Preparation of PDMS–PMAA interpenetrating polymer network membranes using the monomer immersion method. Macromolecules 33:3714–3718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garg P, Singh RP, Choudhary V (2011) Selective polydimethylsiloxane/polyimide blended IPN pervaporation membrane for methanol/toluene azeotrope separation. Sep Purif Technol 76:407–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vidal F, Fichet O, Laskar J, Teyssié D (2006) Polysiloxane–cellulose acetate butyrate cellulose interpenetrating polymers networks close to true IPNs on a large composition range, Part II. Polymer 47:3747–3753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Xie Y, Li HB, Huang RH, Dong YW (2015) Research progress and applications of polysiloxane-based interpenetrating polymer networks. Silicon Mater 29:250–255Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brochu P, Stoyanov H, Niu X, Pei Q (2013) All-silicone prestrain-locked interpenetrating polymer network elastomers: free-standing silicone artificial muscles with improved performance and robustness. Smart Mater Struct 22:955–962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Monge S, Mas A, Hamzaoui A, Kassis CM, Desimone JM, Schué F (2003) Improvement of silicone endothelialization by treatment with allylamine and/or acrylic acid low-pressure plasma. J Appl Polym Sci 87:1794–1802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Koon GN, Min L, En-Tang K, Edmund C, Paul AT (2017) Surface modification strategies for combating catheter-related complications: recent advances and challenges. J Mater Chem B 5:2045–2067Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Saravana KJ, Arunpandian B, Muthu VV, Aruna PS, Agnes AJ, Manjeesh KA, Eko S (2015) Review: radiation-induced surface modification of polymers for biomaterial application. J Mater Sci 50:2007–2018.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-014-8718-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Satriano C, Conte E, Marletta G (2001) Surface chemical structure and cell adhesion onto ion beam modified polysiloxane. Langmuir 17:2243–2250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Everaert EPJM, Mahieu HF, Wong Chong RP, Verkerke GJ, Vander Mei HC, Busscher HJ (1997) A new method for in vivo evaluation of biofilms, on surface-modified silicone rubber voice prostheses. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 254:261–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ammar A, Nicolas C, Jenny F, Mohamed MC, Damien C, Matthieu P (2011) Robust method for high-throughput surface patterning of deformable substrates. Langmuir 27:7349–7352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Williams RL, Wilson DJ, Rhodes NP (2004) Stability of plasma-treated silicone rubber and its influence on the interfacial aspects of blood compatibility. Biomaterials 25:4659–4673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Andersen TE, Palarasah Y, Skjødt MO, Ogaki R, Kenter M, Alei M, Kolmos HJ, Koch C, Kingshott P (2011) Decreased material-activation of the complement system using low-energy plasma polymerized poly(vinyl pyrrolidone) coatings. Biomaterials 32:4481–4488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chen H, Brook MA, Sheardown HD, Chen Y, Klenkler B (2006) Generic bioaffinity silicone surfaces. Bioconjugate Chem 17:21–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yu WH, Kang ET, Neoh KG (2004) Controlled grafting of well-defined epoxide polymers on hydrogen-terminated silicon substrates by surface-initiated ATRP at ambient temperature. Langmuir 20:8294–8300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Melissa LH, Marc AR, Jeffery ER, Melissa AG (2014) Direct observation of the nanocomplex surface reorganization of antifouling silicones containing a highly mobile PEO–silane amphiphile. J Mater Chem B 2:5689–5697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hauser J, Zietlow J, Köller M (2009) Enhanced cell adhesion to silicone implant material through plasma surface modification. J Mater Sci 20:2541–2548.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-009-3826-x Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hou Y, Schoener CA, Regan KR, Munoz-Pinto D, Hahn MS, Grunlan MA (2010) Photo-cross-linked PDMS-star-PEG hydrogels: synthesis, characterization, and potential application for tissue engineering scaffolds. Biomacromolecules 11:648–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Anat L, Barbara T, Ilana P, Roland L, Christoph S, Gibson SN, Georg MG, Aharon G (2015) Ultrasound coating of polydimethylsiloxanes with antimicrobial enzyme. J Mater Chem B 3:7014–7019Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lin W, Zhang J, Wang Z, Chen SF (2011) Development of robust biocompatible silicone with high resistance to protein adsorption and bacterial adhesion. Acta Biomater 7:2053–2059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wan F, Pei X, Yu B (2012) Grafting polymer brushes on biomimetic structural surfaces for anti-algae fouling and foul release. ACS Appl Mater interfaces 4:4557–4565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ngo TC, Kalinova R, Cossement D, Hennebert E, Mincheva R, SnydersR Flammang P, Dubois P, Lazzaroni R, Leclère P (2014) Modification of the adhesive properties of silicone-based coatings by block copolymers. Langmuir 30:358–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Narges H, Kai Y, Yan M, Jayachandran NK (2014) Polymer brush-based approaches for the development of infection-resistant surfaces. J Mater Chem B 2:4968–4978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yammine P, Pavondjavid G, Helary G, Migonney V (2005) Surface modification of silicone intraocular implants to inhibit cell proliferation. Biomacromolecules 6:2630–2637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jalili K Abbas, Abbas F, Milchev A (2013) Surface microdynamics phase transition and internal structure of high-density, ultrathin PHEMA-b-PNIPAM diblock copolymer brushes on silicone rubber. Macromolecules 46:5260–5278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ghoreishi SG, Abbasi F, Jalili K (2016) Hydrophilicity improvement of silicone rubber by interpenetrating polymer network formation in the proximal layer of polymer surface. J Polym Res 23:115–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Paquet O, Salon MCB, Zeno E, Belgacem MN (2012) Hydrolysis-condensation kinetics of 3-(2-amino-ethylamino)propyl-trimethoxysilane. Mat Sci Eng C 32:487–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Liu SM, Lang XM, Ye H, Zhang S, Zhao J (2005) Preparation and characterization of copolymerized aminopropyl/phenylsilsesquioxane microparticles. Eur Polym J 41:996–1001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Xie Y, Houbin LI, Huang R (2015) Synthesis of amino silicone resins by three-step method and characterization. J Wuhan Univ Technol 20:59–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Liu SM, Fu Y, Jiang ZJ (2009) Synthesis and characterization of soluble and meltable poly(aminopropyl/phenylsilsesquioxane). J Wuhan Univ Technol 24:945–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Brochier-Salon MC, Bayle PA, Abdelmouleh M, Boufi S, Belgacem MN (2008) Kinetics of hydrolysis and self condensation reactions of silanes by NMR spectroscopy. Colloid Surf A 312:83–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Li X, Li B, Zhang X, Li C, Guo Z, Zhou D, Lu X (2016) Detecting surface hydration of poly (2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) in solution in situ. Macromolecules 49:3116–3125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kuddannaya S, Bao J, Zhang Y (2015) Enhanced in vitro biocompatibility of chemically modified poly(dimethylsiloxane) surfaces for stable adhesion and long-term investigation of brain cerebral cortex cells. Acs Appl Mater Interfaces 7:25529–25538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Gao N, Liu Wu, Yan Z, Wang Z (2013) Synthesis and properties of transparent cycloaliphatic epoxy–silicone resins for opto-electronic devices packaging. Optical Materials 35: 567–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wang Y, Huang Z, Zhang L (2007) Study on damping properties and thermal stability of polymethylvinylsiloxane/butyl composites. Mater Rev 21:148–150Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Xu Q, Pang M, Zhu L, Zhang Y, Feng S (2010) Mechanical properties of silicone rubber composed of diverse vinyl content silicone gums blending. Mater Des 31:4083–4087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sung PH, Wu SY (1998) Polysiloxane modified epoxy networks (III) strain-induced crystallization of jointed interpenetrating polymer networks in fracture mode. Polymer 39:7033–7039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Park IH, Lee JH, Kim SC (1983) Dynamic mechanical properties of interpenetrating polymer networks of polyurethane and poly(styrene-co-acrylonitrile). Polym Bull 10:126–133Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lee DS, Kim SC (1984) Polyurethane interpenetrating polymer networks (IPN’s) synthesized under high pressure. 3. Morphology and Tg behavior of polyurethane-polystyrene semi-IPN’s and linear blends. Macromolecules 17:2222–2227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Du Z, Qin J, Wang W, Zhu Y, Wang G (2015) Synthesis, surface activities and aggregation behaviors of butynediol-ethoxylate modified polysiloxanes. J Phys Chem B 119:14180–14187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Rufin MA, Gruetzner JA, Hurley MJ, Hawkins ML, Raymond ES, Raymond JE, Grunlan MA (2015) Enhancing the protein resistance of silicone via surface-restructuring PEO–silane amphiphiles with variable PEO length. J Mater Chem B 3:2816–2825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bainor A, Chang L, Mcquade TJ, Webb B, Gestwicki JE (2011) Bicinchoninic acid (BCA) assay in low volume. Anal Biochem 410:310–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Power and Mechanical EngineeringWuhan UniversityWuhanPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.School of Printing and PackagingWuhan UniversityWuhanPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Xi’an Modern Chemistry Research InstituteXi’anPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations