A Fundamental Approach Toward Polymers and Polymer Composites: Current Trends for Biomedical Applications

  • Rajan ChoudharyEmail author
  • Mohit Saraswat
  • Senthil Kumar Venkatraman
Part of the Lecture Notes in Bioengineering book series (LNBE)


Polymers and their composites are widely studied for various biomedical applications including hard tissue regeneration, wound healing, artificial skin, antibacterial oxygenators, and drug delivery carriers. Both natural and synthetic polymers are employed for clinical applications and possess numerous advantages and a few limitations. State-of-the-art microarray technique assists in rapid screening of most suitable polymeric materials for biomedical applications and 3D printing aids in fabricating scaffolds with desirable porosity to mimic the architecture of natural tissues. The insufficient mechanical strength and hydrophobic nature of polymers restrict their applications in the field of tissue engineering. The incorporation of inorganic bioactive ceramics as filler in the organic polymer matrix is expected to eliminate these limitations. The present chapter describes the current advancements made in using polymers and its composites for biological applications and predicts the future studies to make these materials as a promising alternative for traditional metallic implants. A brief discussion on the emerging techniques and significant research done is also presented.


Biomaterial Polymer Composites Gas permeability Additive manufacturing Microarray Tissue engineering applications 



Authors thank Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT) for financial support. With immense pleasure and deep sense of gratitude, authors wish to express sincere thanks to Dr. S. Sasikumar, Associate Professor, School of Advanced Sciences (SAS), VIT, without his motivation and continuous encouragement, this book chapter would not have been successfully completed.


  1. Allison DD, Grande-Allen KJ (2006) Review. Hyaluronan: a powerful tissue engineering tool. Tissue Eng 12:2131–2140Google Scholar
  2. Alonso-Sierra S, Velázquez-Castillo R, Millán-Malo B et al (2017) Interconnected porosity analysis by 3D X-ray microtomography and mechanical behavior of biomimetic organic-inorganic composite materials. Mater Sci Eng, C 80:45–53Google Scholar
  3. Antoniac IV (2016) Handbook of bioceramics and biocomposites. Springer, BaselGoogle Scholar
  4. Armentano I, Dottori M, Fortunati E et al (2010) Biodegradable polymer matrix nanocomposites for tissue engineering: a review. Polym Degrad Stab 95:2126–2146Google Scholar
  5. Basile MA, D’Ayala GG, Laurienzo P et al (2012) Development of innovative biopolymers and related composites for bone tissue regeneration: study of their interaction with human osteoprogenitor cells. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater 10:210–214Google Scholar
  6. Bhat SV (2005) Biomaterials. Narosa Publishing House, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  7. Bheemaneni G, Saravana S, Kandaswamy R (2018) Processing and characterization of poly (butylene adipate-coterephthalate)/wollastonite biocomposites for medical applications. Mater Today: Proc 5:1807–1816Google Scholar
  8. Boccaccini AR, Maquet V (2003) Bioresorbable and bioactive polymer/bioglass composites with tailored pore structure for tissue engineering applications. Compos Sci Technol 63(16):2417–2429Google Scholar
  9. Bousalem S, Yassar A, Basinska T et al (2003) Synthesis, characterization and biomedical applications of functionalized polypyrrole-coated polystyrene latex particles. Polym Adv Technol 14:820–825Google Scholar
  10. BragaI FJC, RogeroI SO, CoutoI AA et al (2007) Characterization of PVDF/HAP composites for medical applications. Mate Res 10:1–8Google Scholar
  11. Bregnocchi A, Chandraiahgari CR, Zanni E et al (2016) PVDF composite films including graphene/ZnO nanostructures and their antimicrobial activity. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on nanotechnology Sendai, JapanGoogle Scholar
  12. Cardoso VF, Correia DM, Ribeiro C et al (2018) Fluorinated polymers as smart materials for advanced biomedical applications. Polymers 10:1–26Google Scholar
  13. Chandy T, Sharma CP (1990) Chitosan-as a biomaterial. Artif Cells, Blood Subst Biotechnol 18:1–24Google Scholar
  14. Chen Z, Wang T, Yan Q (2018) Building a polysaccharide hydrogel capsule delivery system for control release of ibuprofen. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed 29:309–324Google Scholar
  15. Choudhary R, Koppala S, Srivastava A et al (2015) In vitro bioactivity of nanocrystalline and bulk larnite/chitosan composites: comparative study. J Sol-Gel Sci Technol 74:631–640Google Scholar
  16. Choudhary R, Venkatraman SK, Rana A et al (2016) In vitro bioactivity studies of larnite and larnite/chitin composites prepared from biowaste for biomedical applications. Bull Mater Sci 39:1213–1221Google Scholar
  17. Chung UI, Itaka K, Nishiyama N et al (2007) Scaffolds for skeletal regeneration. NanoBiotechnology 3:104–106Google Scholar
  18. Cipitria A, Skelton A, Dargaville T et al (2011) Design, fabrication and characterization of PCL electrospun scaffolds da review. J Mater Chem 21:9419–9453Google Scholar
  19. Cui W, Cheng L, Hu C et al (2013) Electrospun poly (L-lactide) fiber with ginsenoside rg3 for inhibiting scar hyperplasia of skin. PLoS ONE 8:68771Google Scholar
  20. Daamen WF, van Moerkerk HTB, Hafmans T et al (2003) Preparation and evaluation of molecularly defined collagen-elastin-glycosaminoglycan scaffolds for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 24:4001–4009Google Scholar
  21. Dalby MJ, Di Silvio L, Harper EJ et al (1999) In vitro evaluation of a new polymethylmethacrylate cement reinforced with hydroxyapatite. J Mater Sci Mater Med 10:793–796Google Scholar
  22. Davis JR (2003) Handbook of materials for medical devices. ASM International, Materials ParkGoogle Scholar
  23. Dey K, Agnelli S, Serzanti M et al (2018) Preparation and properties of high performance gelatin-based hydrogels with chitosan or hydroxyethyl cellulose for tissue engineering applications. Int J Polym Mater Polym Biomater
  24. Dhandayuthapani B, Yoshida Y, Maekawa T et al (2011) Polymeric scaffolds in tissue engineering application: a review. Int J Polym Sci 2011:1–19Google Scholar
  25. Diba M, Kharaziha M, Fathi MH et al (2012) Preparation and characterization of polycaprolactone/forsterite nanocomposite porous scaffolds designed for bone tissue regeneration. Compos Sci Tech 72:716–723Google Scholar
  26. Diba M, Goudouri O-M, Tapia F et al (2014) Magnesium-containing bioactive polycrystalline silicate-based ceramics and glass-ceramics for biomedical applications. Curr Opin Solid State Mater Sci 18:147–167Google Scholar
  27. Diez M, Kang M-H, Kim S-M et al (2016) Hydroxyapatite (HA)/poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA) dual coating on magnesium alloy under deformation for biomedical applications. J Mater Sci Mater Med 27:34Google Scholar
  28. Dorozhkin SV (2010) Bioceramics of calcium orthophosphates. Biomaterials 31:1465–1485Google Scholar
  29. Dos Santos V, Brandalise RN, Savaris M (2017) Engineering of biomaterials. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  30. Duffy C, Venturato A, Callanan A et al (2016) Arrays of 3D double-network hydrogels for the high-throughput discovery of materials with enhanced physical and biological properties. Acta Biomater 34:104–112Google Scholar
  31. Dziadek M, Stodolak-Zych E, Cholewa-Kowalska K (2017) Biodegradable ceramic-polymer composites for biomedical applications: a review. Mater Sci Eng, C 71:1175–1191Google Scholar
  32. Enderale J, Blanchard S, Bronzino J (2005) Introduction to biomedical engineering. Elsevier Academic Press, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  33. Fini M, Motta A, Torricelli P et al (2005) The healing of confined critical size cancellous defects in the presence of silk fibroin hydrogel. Biomaterials 26:3527–3536Google Scholar
  34. Fray ME, Prowans P, Puskas JE, Altstadt V (2006) Biocompatibility and fatigue properties of polystyrene-polyisobutylene-polystyrene, an emerging thermoplastic elastomeric biomaterial. Biomacromolecules 7:844–850Google Scholar
  35. Freyman TM, Yannas IV, Gibson LJ (2001) Cellular materials as porous scaffolds for tissue engineering. Prog Mater Sci 46:273–282Google Scholar
  36. Gentile P, Chiono V, Carmagnola I et al (2014) An overview of poly(lactic-co-glycolic) acid (PLGA)-based biomaterials for bone tissue engineering. Int J Mol Sci 15:3640–3659Google Scholar
  37. Gil-Albarova J, Vila M, Badiola-Vargas J et al (2012) In vivo osteointegration of three-dimensional crosslinked gelatin-coated hydroxyapatite foams. Acta Biomater 8:3777–3783Google Scholar
  38. Goodman S (2005) Wear particulate and osteolysis. Orthop Clin North Am 36:41–48Google Scholar
  39. Goswami J, Bhatnagar N, Mohanty S et al (2013) Processing and characterization of poly(lactic acid) based bioactive composites for biomedical scaffold application. Express Polym Lett 7:767–777Google Scholar
  40. Guvendiren M, Molde J, Soares RMD et al (2016) Designing biomaterials for 3D printing. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 2:1679–1693Google Scholar
  41. Haider A, Haider S, Kang I-K et al (2018) A novel use of cellulose based filter paper containing silver nanoparticles for its potential application as wound dressing agent. Int J Biol Macromol 108:455–461Google Scholar
  42. Han HH, Yun S, Won J-Y et al (2018) Orbital wall reconstruction in rabbits using 3D printed polycaprolactone–β-tricalcium phosphate thin membrane. Mater Lett 218:280–284Google Scholar
  43. Harris JM (1992) Introduction to biotechnical and biomedical applications of poly(ethylene glycol). In: Harris JM (ed) Poly(ethylene glycol) chemistry. Topics in applied chemistry. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  44. Haryanto F, Mahardian A (2017) Biocompatible hydrogel film of polyethylene oxide-polyethylene glycol dimetacrylate for wound dressing application. IOP Conf Ser Mater Eng 288:012076Google Scholar
  45. Hindumathi R, Jagannatham M, Haridoss P et al (2018) Novel nano-cocoon like structures of polyethylene glycol–multiwalled carbon nanotubes for biomedical applications. Nano-Structures Nano-Objects 13:30–35Google Scholar
  46. Holzapfel BM, Reichert JC, Schantz J-T et al (2013) How smart do biomaterials need to be? A translational science and clinical point of view. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 65:581–603Google Scholar
  47. Houchin M, Topp E (2008) Chemical degradation of peptides and proteins in PLGA: a review of reactions and mechanisms. J Pharm Sci 97:2395–2404Google Scholar
  48. Ishihara K, Oshida H, Endo Y et al (1992) Hemocompatibility of human whole blood on polymers with a phospholipid polar group and its mechanism. J Biomed Mater Res 26:1543–1552Google Scholar
  49. Iwasakia Y, Uchiyamab S, Kuritab K et al (2002) A nonthrombogenic gas-permeable membrane composed of a phospholipid polymer skin film adhered to a polyethylene porous membrane. Biomaterials 23:3421–3427Google Scholar
  50. Jiang T, Abdel-Fattah WI, Laurencin CT (2006) In vitro evaluation of chitosan/poly(lactic acid-glycolic acid) sintered microsphere scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials 27:4894–4903Google Scholar
  51. Kang JY, Chung CW, Sung J-H et al (2009) Novel porous matrix of hyaluronic acid for the three-dimensional culture of chondrocytes. Int J Pharm 369:114–120Google Scholar
  52. Khan F, Tare RS, Kanczler JM et al (2010) Strategies for cell manipulation and skeletal tissue engineering using high-throughput polymer blend formulation and microarray techniques. Biomaterials 31:2216–2228Google Scholar
  53. Khan F, Smith JO, Kanczler JM et al (2013) Discovery and evaluation of a functional ternary polymer blend for bone repair: translation from a microarray to a clinical model. Adv Funct Mater 23:2850–2862Google Scholar
  54. Klemm D, Heublein B, Fink HP et al (2005) Cellulose: fascinating biopolymer and sustainable raw material. A Chem Int Ed 44:3358Google Scholar
  55. Kolobow T, Borelli M, Spatola R (1986) Artificial lung (oxygenators). Artif Organs 10:370–377Google Scholar
  56. Lasprilla AJ, Martinez GA, Lunelli BH et al (2012) Polylactic acid synthesis for application in biomedical devices a review. Biotechnol Adv 30:321–328Google Scholar
  57. Lee KY, Mooney DJ (2012) Alginate: properties and biomedical applications. Prog Polym Sci 37:106–126Google Scholar
  58. Lee K-H, Rhee S-H (2009) The mechanical properties and bioactivity of poly(methyl methacrylate)/SiO2–CaO Nanocomposite. Biomaterials 30:3444–3449Google Scholar
  59. Lee CH, Singla A, Lee Y (2001) Biomedical applications of collagen. Int J Pharm 221:1–22Google Scholar
  60. Li Z, Ramay HR, Hauch KD et al (2005) Chitosan alginate hybrid scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials 26:3919–3928Google Scholar
  61. Lin K-F, He S, Song Y et al (2016a) Low temperature additive manufacturing biomimic three dimensional hydroxyapatite/collagen scaffolds for bone regeneration. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 8:6905–6916Google Scholar
  62. Lin K, Lin C, Zeng Y (2016b) High mechanical strength bioactive wollastonite bioceramics sintered from nanofibers. RSC Advances 6:13867–13872Google Scholar
  63. Liu S, Kang M, Li K et al (2015) Polysaccharide-templated preparation of mechanically-tough, conductive and self-healing hydrogels. Chem Eng J 334:2222–2230Google Scholar
  64. Loos C, Syrovets T, Musyanovych A et al (2014a) Functionalized polystyrene nanoparticles as a platform for studying bio–nano interactions. Beilstein J Nanotechnol. 5:2403–2412Google Scholar
  65. Loos C, Syrovets T, Musyanovych A et al (2014b) Amino-functionalized nanoparticles as inhibitors of mTOR and inducers of cell cycle arrest in leukemia cells. Biomaterials 35:1944–1953Google Scholar
  66. Lu DR, Lee SJ, Park K (1991) Calculation of solvation interaction energies for protein adsorption on polymer surfaces. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed 3:127–147Google Scholar
  67. Macha IJ, Ben-Nissan B, Santos J et al (2017) Biocompatibility of a new biodegradable polymer-hydroxyapatite composite for biomedical applications. J Drug Deliv Sci Technol 38:72–77Google Scholar
  68. Malafaya PB, Silva GA, Reis RL (2007) Natural-origin polymers as carriers and scaffolds for biomolecules and cell delivery in tissue engineering applications. Adv Drug Del Rev 59:207–233Google Scholar
  69. Malagurski I, Levic S, Mitric M et al (2018) Bimetallic alginate nanocomposites: new antimicrobial biomaterials for biomedical application. Mater Lett 212:32–36Google Scholar
  70. Marques DR, Dos Santos L, O’Brien MA et al (2017) In vitro evaluation of poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid)/polyisoprene fibers for soft tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res, Part B 105:2581–2591Google Scholar
  71. Meinel L, Karageorgiou V, Hofmann S et al (2004) Engineering bone-like tissue in vitro using human bone marrow stem cells and silk scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res A 71A:25–34Google Scholar
  72. Miculescu F, Maidaniuc A, Voicu SI et al (2017) Progress in hydroxyapatite–starch based sustainable biomaterials for biomedical bone substitution applications. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 5:8491–8512Google Scholar
  73. Mirsalehi SA, Sattari M, Khavandi A et al (2015) Tensile and biocompatibility properties of synthesized nano-hydroxyapatite reinforced ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene nanocomposite. J Compos Mater 50:1725–1737Google Scholar
  74. Naira LS, Laurencin CT (2007) Biodegradable polymers as biomaterials. Prog Polym Sci 32:762–798Google Scholar
  75. Narayan R (2009) Biomedical materials. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  76. Necas J, Bartosikova L, Brauner P et al (2008) Hyaluronic acid (hyaluronan): a review. Veterinarni Med 53:397–411Google Scholar
  77. O’Brien FJ, Harley BA, Yannas IV et al (2005) The effect of pore size on cell adhesion in collagen-GAG scaffolds. Biomaterials 26:433–441Google Scholar
  78. Parenteau-Bareil R, Gauvin R, Berthod F (2010) Collagen-based biomaterials for tissue engineering applications. Materials 3:1863–1887Google Scholar
  79. Parida P, Behera A, Mishra SC (2012) Classification of biomaterials used in medicine. Int J Adv Appl Sci 1:31–35Google Scholar
  80. Park JB, Lakes RS (2007) Biomaterials—an introduction. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  81. Pei S, Ai F, Song QuS (2015) Fabrication and biocompatibility of reduced graphene oxide/poly(vinylidene fluoride) composite membranes. RSC Adv 5:99841–99847Google Scholar
  82. Peng H, Wang S, Xu H et al (2018) Preparations, properties, and formation mechanism of novel cellulose hydrogel membrane based on ionic liquid. J Appl Polym Sci 2018:45488Google Scholar
  83. Perinelli DR, Fagioli L, Campana R et al (2018) Chitosan-based nanosystems and their exploited antimicrobial activity. Eur J Pharm Sci 3:8–20Google Scholar
  84. Piskin K (1995) Biodegradable polymers as biomaterials. J Biomater Sci Polym 6:775–795Google Scholar
  85. Puppi D, Chiellini F, Piras AM et al (2010) Polymeric materials for bone and cartilage repair. Prog Polym Sci 35:403–440Google Scholar
  86. Ramirez-Agudelo R, Scheuermann K, Gala-García A et al (2018) Hybrid nanofibers based on poly-caprolactone/gelatin/hydroxyapatite nanoparticles-loaded Doxycycline: effective antitumoral and antibacterial activity. Mater Sci Eng, C 83:25–34Google Scholar
  87. Ratner BD, Hoffman AS, Lemons JE et al (2004) Biomaterials science—an introduction to materials in medicine. Elsevier Academic Press, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  88. Renteria-Zamarron D, Cortes-Hernandez DA, Bretado-Aragon L et al (2009) Mechanical properties and apatite-forming ability of PMMA bone cements. Mater Des 30:3318–3324Google Scholar
  89. Rezwana K, Chena QZ, Blakera JJ et al (2006) Biodegradable and bioactive porous polymer/inorganic composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials 27:3413–3431Google Scholar
  90. Ribeiro C, Correia DM, Rodrigues I et al (2017) In-vivo demonstration of the suitability of piezoelectric stimuli for bone reparation. Mater Lett 209:118–121Google Scholar
  91. Rijal NP, Adhikari U, Khanal S et al (2018) Magnesium oxide-poly(ε-caprolactone)-chitosan-based composite nanofiber for tissue engineering applications. Mater Sci Eng, B 228:18–27Google Scholar
  92. Rizwan M, Yahya R, Hassan A et al (2018) Synthesis of a novel organosoluble, biocompatible, and antibacterial chitosan derivative for biomedical applications. J Appl Polym Sci 35:45905Google Scholar
  93. Safaei M, Taran M (2018) Optimized synthesis, characterization, and antibacterial activity of an alginate–cupric oxide bionanocomposite. J Appl Polym Sci 135:45682Google Scholar
  94. Sahoo S, Toh SL, Goh JC (2010) A bFGF-releasing silk/PLGA-based biohybrid scaffold for ligament/tendon tissue engineering using mesenchymal progenitor cells. Biomaterials 31:2990–2998Google Scholar
  95. Santos D, Correia CO, Silva DM et al (2017) Incorporation of glass-reinforced hydroxyapatite microparticles into poly(lactic acid) electrospun fibre mats for biomedical applications. Mater Sci Eng, C 75:1184–1190Google Scholar
  96. Seol Y-J, Lee J-Y, Park Y-J et al (2004) Chitosan sponges as tissue engineering scaffolds for bone formation. Biotechnol Lett 26:1037–1041Google Scholar
  97. Sheikh FA, Ju HW, Moon BM et al (2015) Hybrid scaffolds based on PLGA and silk for bone tissue engineering. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 10:209–221Google Scholar
  98. Shen H, Hu X, Bei J et al (2008) The immobilization of basic fibroblast growth factor on plasma-treated poly(lactide-co-glycolide). Biomaterials 29:2388–2399Google Scholar
  99. Shinzato S, Kobayashi M, Mousa WF et al (2000) Bioactive polymethyl methacrylate-based bone cement: comparison of glass beads, apatite- and wollastonite-containing glass-ceramic, and hydroxyapatite fillers on mechanical and biological properties. J Biomed Mater Res, Part A 51:258–272Google Scholar
  100. Shogren RL, Bagley EB (1999) Natural polymers as advanced materials: some research needs and directions. In: Iman SH, Greene RV, Zaidi BR (eds) Biopolymers. Utilizing nature’s advanced materials, ACS symposium series 723. Oxford University Press, CaryGoogle Scholar
  101. Shu XZ, Liu Y, Palumbo F et al (2003) Disulfide-crosslinked hyaluronan-gelatin hydrogel films: a covalent mimic of the extracellular matrix for in vitro cell growth. Biomaterials 24:3825–3834Google Scholar
  102. Smyth M, Rader C, Bras J et al (2018) Characterization and mechanical properties of ultraviolet stimuli-responsive functionalized cellulose nanocrystals alginate composites. J Appl Polym Sci 135:45857Google Scholar
  103. Stratton S, Shelke NB, Hoshino K et al (2016) Bioactive polymeric scaffolds for tissue engineering. Bioact Mater 1:93–108Google Scholar
  104. Sukanya VS, Mohanan PV (2017) Degradation of Poly(ε-caprolactone) and bio-interactions with mouse bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells. Colloids and Surf B Biointerfaces 163:107–118Google Scholar
  105. Sun W, Chen G, Wang F et al (2018) Polyelectrolyte-complex multilayer membrane with gradient porous structure based on natural polymers for wound care. Carbohydr Polym 181:183–190Google Scholar
  106. Svensson A, Nicklasson E, Harrah T et al (2005) Bacterial cellulose as a potential scaffold for tissue engineering of cartilage. Biomaterials 26:419–431Google Scholar
  107. Teng J, Yang B, Zhang L-Q et al (2018) Ultra-high mechanical properties of porous composites based on regenerated cellulose and cross-linked poly(ethylene glycol). Carbohyd Polym 179:244–251Google Scholar
  108. Tseng T-C, Tao L, Hsieh F-Y et al (2015) An injectable, self-healing hydrogel to repair the central nervous system. Adv Mater 27:3518–3524Google Scholar
  109. Turner NJ, Kielty CM, Walker MG et al (2004) A novel hyaluronan-based biomaterial (Hyaff-11) as a scaffold for endothelial cells in tissue engineered vascular grafts. Biomaterials 25:5955–5964Google Scholar
  110. Venkateswaran S, Gwynne PJ, Wu M et al (2016) High-throughput identification of bacteria repellent polymers for medical devices. J Vis Exp 117:e54382Google Scholar
  111. Vepari C, Kaplan DL (2007) Silk as a biomaterial. Prog Polym Sci 32:991–1007Google Scholar
  112. Wakitani S, Goto T, Pineda SJ et al (1994) Mesenchymal cell-based repair of large, full-thickness defects of articular cartilage. J Bone Joint Surg Am 76:579–592Google Scholar
  113. Wang L, Shelton RM, Cooper PR et al (2003) Evaluation of sodium alginate for bone marrow cell tissue engineering. Biomaterials 24:3475–3481Google Scholar
  114. Wang W, Zheng Z, Huang X et al (2016) Hemocompatibility and oxygenation performance of polysulfone membranes grafted with polyethylene glycol and heparin by plasma-induced surface modification. J Biomed Mater Res, Part B 00B:1–10Google Scholar
  115. Wieland JA, Houchin-Ray TL, Shea LD (2007) Non-viral vector delivery from PEG-hyaluronic acid hydrogels. J Controlled Release 120:233–241Google Scholar
  116. Williams DF (1999) The Williams dictionary of biomaterials. Liverpool University Press, LiverpoolGoogle Scholar
  117. Woerly S, Marchand R, Lavallée G (1991) Interactions of copolymeric poly(glyceryl methacrylate)-collagen hydrogels with neural tissue: effects of structure and polar groups. Biomaterials 12:197–203Google Scholar
  118. Woodruff MA, Hutmacher DW (2010) The return of a forgotten polymer polycaprolactone in the 21st century. Prog Polym Sci 35:1217–1256Google Scholar
  119. Xu Y, Han J, Chai Y et al (2018) Development of porous chitosan/tripolyphosphate scaffolds with tunable uncross-linking primary amine content for bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng, C 85:182–190Google Scholar
  120. Yan Y, Sencadas V, Jin T et al (2017) Tailoring the wettability and mechanical properties of electrospun poly(L-lactic acid)-poly(glycerol sebacate) core-shell membranes for biomedical applications. J Colloid Interface Sci 508:87–94Google Scholar
  121. Zhang R, Liberski A, Sanchez-Martin R et al (2009) Microarrays of over 2000 hydrogels—identification of substrates for cellular trapping and thermally triggered release. Biomaterials 30:6193–6201Google Scholar
  122. Zheng Z, Wang W, Huang X et al (2016) Fabrication, characterization, and hemocompatibility investigation of polysulfone grafted with polyethylene glycol and heparin used in membrane oxygenators. Artif Organs 40:E219–E229Google Scholar
  123. Zheng Z, Wang W, Huang X et al (2018) Surface modification of polysulfone hollow fiber membrane for extracorporeal membrane oxygenator using low-temperature plasma treatment. Plasma Process Polym 15:e1700122Google Scholar
  124. Zhong S, Teo WE, Zhu X et al (2006) An aligned nanofibrous collagen scaffold by electrospinning and its effects on in vitro fibroblast culture. J Biomed Mater Res, Part A 79:456–463Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rajan Choudhary
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mohit Saraswat
    • 1
  • Senthil Kumar Venkatraman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Chemistry, School of Advanced SciencesVellore Institute of TechnologyVelloreIndia

Personalised recommendations