Loading…
Physical, mechanical, and biocompatibility evaluation of three different types of silicone rubber
Silicone rubber as a valuable biomaterial is widely used in medical applications, but its surface properties and low wettability make serious problems in long‐term implants. This work was undertaken to evaluate the biocompatibility of modified silicone rubber using two different techniques. A blend...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of applied polymer science 2003-06, Vol.88 (10), p.2522-2529 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4032-e05643dcc6d3a855b33ab5b0c37b8e11057a55f34b2767f894eb5e2e72db3f823 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4032-e05643dcc6d3a855b33ab5b0c37b8e11057a55f34b2767f894eb5e2e72db3f823 |
container_end_page | 2529 |
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 2522 |
container_title | Journal of applied polymer science |
container_volume | 88 |
creator | Fallahi, D. Mirzadeh, H. Khorasani, M. T. |
description | Silicone rubber as a valuable biomaterial is widely used in medical applications, but its surface properties and low wettability make serious problems in long‐term implants. This work was undertaken to evaluate the biocompatibility of modified silicone rubber using two different techniques. A blend of poly(acrylamide) and silicone rubber was compared with virgin silicone surfaces as well as with those modified by laser treatment. Physical and mechanical properties of the samples were examined using different techniques. The hydrophilicity of the silicone rubber increased with increasing hydrogel content and decreased as a result of laser treatment. Both fibroblast cell (L929) and platelet behavior in contact with these surfaces were evaluated in vitro. The morphology of fibroblast cells that adhered to the blends was similar to the control. In contrast, on the laser‐treated surfaces fibroblast cells showed different proliferation. On the other hand, fewer platelets adhered to the laser‐treated surface than adhered to the blend and the unmodified PDMS surfaces. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 88: 2522–2529, 2003 |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/app.11952 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_27931315</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>27931315</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4032-e05643dcc6d3a855b33ab5b0c37b8e11057a55f34b2767f894eb5e2e72db3f823</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1v1DAQhi1EJZaWA_8gF5CQyNYfsZ0ctxHdVqzKIoGWm2U7Y60hX7WTQv49KVng1NPMaJ73ObwIvSZ4TTCml7rv14QUnD5DK4ILmWaC5s_Rav6RNC8K_gK9jPE7xoRwLFZI749T9FbX75MG7FG3y67bKjG-s13T68EbX_thSuBB1-N8dm3SuWQ4BoCk8s5BgHZIhqmH-PiIM227FpIwGgPhAp05XUd4dZrn6Ov1hy_lTbr7tL0tN7vUZpjRFDAXGausFRXTOeeGMW24wZZJkwMhmEvNuWOZoVJIlxcZGA4UJK0Mczll5-jt4u1Ddz9CHFTjo4W61i10Y1RUFowwwmfw3QLa0MUYwKk--EaHSRGsHktUc4nqT4kz--Yk1XEuxgXdWh__BzIhsgLLmbtcuJ--hulpodrs93_N6ZLwcYBf_xI6_FBCMsnV4W6rrq7Kj59FeVDf2G8rSpCE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>27931315</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Physical, mechanical, and biocompatibility evaluation of three different types of silicone rubber</title><source>Wiley</source><creator>Fallahi, D. ; Mirzadeh, H. ; Khorasani, M. T.</creator><creatorcontrib>Fallahi, D. ; Mirzadeh, H. ; Khorasani, M. T.</creatorcontrib><description>Silicone rubber as a valuable biomaterial is widely used in medical applications, but its surface properties and low wettability make serious problems in long‐term implants. This work was undertaken to evaluate the biocompatibility of modified silicone rubber using two different techniques. A blend of poly(acrylamide) and silicone rubber was compared with virgin silicone surfaces as well as with those modified by laser treatment. Physical and mechanical properties of the samples were examined using different techniques. The hydrophilicity of the silicone rubber increased with increasing hydrogel content and decreased as a result of laser treatment. Both fibroblast cell (L929) and platelet behavior in contact with these surfaces were evaluated in vitro. The morphology of fibroblast cells that adhered to the blends was similar to the control. In contrast, on the laser‐treated surfaces fibroblast cells showed different proliferation. On the other hand, fewer platelets adhered to the laser‐treated surface than adhered to the blend and the unmodified PDMS surfaces. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 88: 2522–2529, 2003</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8995</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-4628</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/app.11952</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JAPNAB</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><subject>Applied sciences ; biocompatibility ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biological properties ; Biotechnology ; blends ; Exact sciences and technology ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; hydrophilicity ; Organic polymers ; Physicochemistry of polymers ; poly(acrylamide) ; Polymer industry, paints, wood ; Properties and characterization ; Properties and testing ; silicones ; Solution and gel properties ; Technology of polymers</subject><ispartof>Journal of applied polymer science, 2003-06, Vol.88 (10), p.2522-2529</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><rights>2003 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4032-e05643dcc6d3a855b33ab5b0c37b8e11057a55f34b2767f894eb5e2e72db3f823</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4032-e05643dcc6d3a855b33ab5b0c37b8e11057a55f34b2767f894eb5e2e72db3f823</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=14664907$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Fallahi, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mirzadeh, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khorasani, M. T.</creatorcontrib><title>Physical, mechanical, and biocompatibility evaluation of three different types of silicone rubber</title><title>Journal of applied polymer science</title><addtitle>J. Appl. Polym. Sci</addtitle><description>Silicone rubber as a valuable biomaterial is widely used in medical applications, but its surface properties and low wettability make serious problems in long‐term implants. This work was undertaken to evaluate the biocompatibility of modified silicone rubber using two different techniques. A blend of poly(acrylamide) and silicone rubber was compared with virgin silicone surfaces as well as with those modified by laser treatment. Physical and mechanical properties of the samples were examined using different techniques. The hydrophilicity of the silicone rubber increased with increasing hydrogel content and decreased as a result of laser treatment. Both fibroblast cell (L929) and platelet behavior in contact with these surfaces were evaluated in vitro. The morphology of fibroblast cells that adhered to the blends was similar to the control. In contrast, on the laser‐treated surfaces fibroblast cells showed different proliferation. On the other hand, fewer platelets adhered to the laser‐treated surface than adhered to the blend and the unmodified PDMS surfaces. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 88: 2522–2529, 2003</description><subject>Applied sciences</subject><subject>biocompatibility</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biological properties</subject><subject>Biotechnology</subject><subject>blends</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>hydrophilicity</subject><subject>Organic polymers</subject><subject>Physicochemistry of polymers</subject><subject>poly(acrylamide)</subject><subject>Polymer industry, paints, wood</subject><subject>Properties and characterization</subject><subject>Properties and testing</subject><subject>silicones</subject><subject>Solution and gel properties</subject><subject>Technology of polymers</subject><issn>0021-8995</issn><issn>1097-4628</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kE1v1DAQhi1EJZaWA_8gF5CQyNYfsZ0ctxHdVqzKIoGWm2U7Y60hX7WTQv49KVng1NPMaJ73ObwIvSZ4TTCml7rv14QUnD5DK4ILmWaC5s_Rav6RNC8K_gK9jPE7xoRwLFZI749T9FbX75MG7FG3y67bKjG-s13T68EbX_thSuBB1-N8dm3SuWQ4BoCk8s5BgHZIhqmH-PiIM227FpIwGgPhAp05XUd4dZrn6Ov1hy_lTbr7tL0tN7vUZpjRFDAXGausFRXTOeeGMW24wZZJkwMhmEvNuWOZoVJIlxcZGA4UJK0Mczll5-jt4u1Ddz9CHFTjo4W61i10Y1RUFowwwmfw3QLa0MUYwKk--EaHSRGsHktUc4nqT4kz--Yk1XEuxgXdWh__BzIhsgLLmbtcuJ--hulpodrs93_N6ZLwcYBf_xI6_FBCMsnV4W6rrq7Kj59FeVDf2G8rSpCE</recordid><startdate>20030606</startdate><enddate>20030606</enddate><creator>Fallahi, D.</creator><creator>Mirzadeh, H.</creator><creator>Khorasani, M. T.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</general><general>Wiley</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JG9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20030606</creationdate><title>Physical, mechanical, and biocompatibility evaluation of three different types of silicone rubber</title><author>Fallahi, D. ; Mirzadeh, H. ; Khorasani, M. T.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4032-e05643dcc6d3a855b33ab5b0c37b8e11057a55f34b2767f894eb5e2e72db3f823</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Applied sciences</topic><topic>biocompatibility</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biological properties</topic><topic>Biotechnology</topic><topic>blends</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>hydrophilicity</topic><topic>Organic polymers</topic><topic>Physicochemistry of polymers</topic><topic>poly(acrylamide)</topic><topic>Polymer industry, paints, wood</topic><topic>Properties and characterization</topic><topic>Properties and testing</topic><topic>silicones</topic><topic>Solution and gel properties</topic><topic>Technology of polymers</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Fallahi, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mirzadeh, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khorasani, M. T.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><jtitle>Journal of applied polymer science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Fallahi, D.</au><au>Mirzadeh, H.</au><au>Khorasani, M. T.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Physical, mechanical, and biocompatibility evaluation of three different types of silicone rubber</atitle><jtitle>Journal of applied polymer science</jtitle><addtitle>J. Appl. Polym. Sci</addtitle><date>2003-06-06</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>88</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>2522</spage><epage>2529</epage><pages>2522-2529</pages><issn>0021-8995</issn><eissn>1097-4628</eissn><coden>JAPNAB</coden><abstract>Silicone rubber as a valuable biomaterial is widely used in medical applications, but its surface properties and low wettability make serious problems in long‐term implants. This work was undertaken to evaluate the biocompatibility of modified silicone rubber using two different techniques. A blend of poly(acrylamide) and silicone rubber was compared with virgin silicone surfaces as well as with those modified by laser treatment. Physical and mechanical properties of the samples were examined using different techniques. The hydrophilicity of the silicone rubber increased with increasing hydrogel content and decreased as a result of laser treatment. Both fibroblast cell (L929) and platelet behavior in contact with these surfaces were evaluated in vitro. The morphology of fibroblast cells that adhered to the blends was similar to the control. In contrast, on the laser‐treated surfaces fibroblast cells showed different proliferation. On the other hand, fewer platelets adhered to the laser‐treated surface than adhered to the blend and the unmodified PDMS surfaces. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 88: 2522–2529, 2003</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</pub><doi>10.1002/app.11952</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0021-8995 |
ispartof | Journal of applied polymer science, 2003-06, Vol.88 (10), p.2522-2529 |
issn | 0021-8995 1097-4628 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_27931315 |
source | Wiley |
subjects | Applied sciences biocompatibility Biological and medical sciences Biological properties Biotechnology blends Exact sciences and technology Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology hydrophilicity Organic polymers Physicochemistry of polymers poly(acrylamide) Polymer industry, paints, wood Properties and characterization Properties and testing silicones Solution and gel properties Technology of polymers |
title | Physical, mechanical, and biocompatibility evaluation of three different types of silicone rubber |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T09%3A07%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Physical,%20mechanical,%20and%20biocompatibility%20evaluation%20of%20three%20different%20types%20of%20silicone%20rubber&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20applied%20polymer%20science&rft.au=Fallahi,%20D.&rft.date=2003-06-06&rft.volume=88&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=2522&rft.epage=2529&rft.pages=2522-2529&rft.issn=0021-8995&rft.eissn=1097-4628&rft.coden=JAPNAB&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/app.11952&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E27931315%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4032-e05643dcc6d3a855b33ab5b0c37b8e11057a55f34b2767f894eb5e2e72db3f823%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=27931315&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |