Vivian R Feig1, Helen Tran2, Zhenan Bao2. 1. Department of Material Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United States. 2. Department of Chemical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United States.
Abstract
Biodegradable electronics have great potential to reduce the environmental footprint of devices and enable advanced health monitoring and therapeutic technologies. Complex biodegradable electronics require biodegradable substrates, insulators, conductors, and semiconductors, all of which comprise the fundamental building blocks of devices. This review will survey recent trends in the strategies used to fabricate biodegradable forms of each of these components. Polymers that can disintegrate without full chemical breakdown (type I), as well as those that can be recycled into monomeric and oligomeric building blocks (type II), will be discussed. Type I degradation is typically achieved with engineering and material science based strategies, whereas type II degradation often requires deliberate synthetic approaches. Notably, unconventional degradable linkages capable of maintaining long-range conjugation have been relatively unexplored, yet may enable fully biodegradable conductors and semiconductors with uncompromised electrical properties. While substantial progress has been made in developing degradable device components, the electrical and mechanical properties of these materials must be improved before fully degradable complex electronics can be realized.
Biodegradable electronics have great potential to reduce the environmental footprint of devices and enable advanced health monitoring and therapeutic technologies. Complex biodegradable electronics require biodegradable substrates, insulators, conductors, and semiconductors, all of which comprise the fundamental building blocks of devices. This review will survey recent trends in the strategies used to fabricate biodegradable forms of each of these components. Polymers that can disintegrate without full chemical breakdown (type I), as well as those that can be recycled into monomeric and oligomeric building blocks (type II), will be discussed. Type I degradation is typically achieved with engineering and material science based strategies, whereas type II degradation often requires deliberate synthetic approaches. Notably, unconventional degradable linkages capable of maintaining long-range conjugation have been relatively unexplored, yet may enable fully biodegradable conductors and semiconductors with uncompromised electrical properties. While substantial progress has been made in developing degradable device components, the electrical and mechanical properties of these materials must be improved before fully degradable complex electronics can be realized.
As electronics become
more integrated with our daily lives, there is an increasing demand
for transience: the ability for technology to interact with nature
without leaving a permanent mark. Conducting, semiconducting, dielectric,
and substrate polymers are a natural bridge between electronics and
soft matter, because the vast chemical design space for polymers allows
tunability of electronic, mechanical, and transient properties (Figure A). The tunability
of intrinsic polymer properties is beneficial for the development
of advanced biodegradable electronics, since it circumvents the need
to use complex architectures and patterns to achieve desired properties.
Figure 1
(A) Biodegradable
electronics have numerous promising applications within the body and
the environment. A typical electronic device, like the one depicted
on this leaf, is built up from four main classes of materials: semiconductors
(blue), conductors (silver), dielectrics (orange), and substrates
(light green). (B) In general, biodegradable materials with desired
electronic properties consist of an active material (dark blue) dispersed
within a biodegradable matrix (light blue). For example, dielectric
materials may use high dielectric constant fillers as active materials,
whereas semiconductors and conductors use conjugated polymers as active
materials that provide electronic conduction pathways within the matrix.
Regardless of their electronic properties, the biodegradable materials
discussed in this review can be classified into one of two categories.
Type I materials are disintegrable, though only the matrix, which
holds together nondegradable active materials, can be fully broken
down into small molecule building blocks. On the other hand, both
the matrix and active materials comprising type II materials can be
fully broken down into monomers or oligomers. Because type II materials
are fully biodegradable, they can potentially also be recycled.
(A) Biodegradable
electronics have numerous promising applications within the body and
the environment. A typical electronic device, like the one depicted
on this leaf, is built up from four main classes of materials: semiconductors
(blue), conductors (silver), dielectrics (orange), and substrates
(light green). (B) In general, biodegradable materials with desired
electronic properties consist of an active material (dark blue) dispersed
within a biodegradable matrix (light blue). For example, dielectric
materials may use high dielectric constant fillers as active materials,
whereas semiconductors and conductors use conjugated polymers as active
materials that provide electronic conduction pathways within the matrix.
Regardless of their electronic properties, the biodegradable materials
discussed in this review can be classified into one of two categories.
Type I materials are disintegrable, though only the matrix, which
holds together nondegradable active materials, can be fully broken
down into small molecule building blocks. On the other hand, both
the matrix and active materials comprising type II materials can be
fully broken down into monomers or oligomers. Because type II materials
are fully biodegradable, they can potentially also be recycled.While the term “biodegradability”
is not unanimously consistent across the literature, the minimum consensus
is that biodegradable materials can be broken down into smaller constituent
pieces at biologically benign or physiological conditions. For many
applications, complete breakdown of polymers into their monomeric
building blocks is unnecessary, and mere disintegration of devices
is sufficient to alleviate the need for invasive and costly retrieval
procedures. In this review, materials that display transient behavior
will be referred to as type I (Figure B).Disintegrable (type I) materials may have
a major impact on the biomedical field, especially in basic research,
therapeutics, and drug delivery.[1] Even
slightly conductive materials can be used to register and transmit
biological electrical signals, a property that has been harnessed
successfully for tissue engineering applications. Transience on the
same time scale as healing or regeneration is critical for such in vivo applications, since nondegradable scaffolds risk
causing a chronic inflammatory response.[2,3] In the longer
term, degradable complex implanted devices would avoid device removal
surgeries, reducing the likelihood of infection.[4] For any in vivo application, the material
and its degradation products must be non-cytotoxic and capable of
disposal by the body through processes like phagocytosis, metabolization,
or bioabsorption.[5,6]Outside of the body, type
I devices engineered to operate for a defined time scale may enable
new sensing capabilities for mass-scale data acquisition without a
permanent environmental footprint. Notably, the ICARUS (Inbound, Controlled,
Air-Releasable, Unrecoverable Systems) program launched by the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) aims to create vanishing
systems that could be deployed via aircraft to hard-to-access territories
where manual recovery would be prohibitively difficult and expensive.[7] For such applications, biodegradability entails
that the material must be fully converted by microorganisms into biomass
and gases at time scales comparable to typical sewage and waste processing
lifetimes.[6]Beyond macroscopic degradation,
the molecular cleavage of the polymer backbone into oligomers and
monomers enables further breakdown by microorganisms in the environment
or via immunological mechanisms in the body. Ultimately, this more
complete chemical degradation, which will be referred to as type II,
is critical for creating sustainable devices comprising fully recyclable
materials (Figure B).Type II biodegradable electronics may help relieve the
environmentally critical problem of discarded electronic waste, which
has become exacerbated as electronics become more inexpensive and
pervasive, resulting in cases of contaminated soil and water supplies.[8] This trend is anticipated to worsen with the
advent of technologies contributing to the Internet of Things. Furthermore,
materials that can break down into bioderived or natural building
blocks are highly desired due to their intrinsic biocompatibility,
biodegradation, and recyclability. While significant work still needs
to be done to fully understand the life cycles of new materials developed,
both in the environment and within the body, type II materials that
can break down into known biocompatible small molecules are less likely
to elicit negative long-term responses.This review will introduce common chemistries utilized in creating
biodegradable polymers, and will highlight specific examples of polymers
that not are only biodegradable but also are able to be used in electronic
devices as either substrates, dielectrics, conductors, or semiconductors.
Common Chemistries Used for Biodegradable Materials
Biodegradable polymers include naturally derived materials and synthetic
polymers. Among naturally derived materials, plant-based polysaccharides
(e.g., cellulose, alginate, dextran) and animal-derived polymers (e.g.,
collagen, silk, chitosan) have been employed for transient applications
due to their intrinsic enzymatic degradability. However, these materials
can exhibit high batch-to-batch variation and typically have inherent
bioactivity, which can elicit immunogenic response when introduced
into the body.[3] Conversely, synthetic polymers
typically display more predictable physical properties and degradation
profiles that can be chemically engineered, and are typically biologically
inert.[3] Widely used synthetic biodegradable
polymers (e.g., polylactide, PLA; polycaprolactone, PCL; polyglycolide,
PGL) contain an ester bond to impart hydrolytic degradation.[9] Other chemically and enzymatically hydrolytic
degradable moieties include amide, thioester, anhydride, carbonate,
urea, urethane, imide, and imine bonds, which serve as sites on the
polymer backbone for cleavage under biologically benign conditions
(Figure A). While
there have been reports of enzymatic cleavage of carbon–carbon
bonds and potential of other moieties (e.g., sulfonamides, phosphonates,
ethers) susceptible to hydrolysis with catalytic acid or base (Figure C), most of the literature
related to electronic biodegradable polymers has thus far been limited
to utilizing the aforementioned hydrolyzable linkages to degrade in
physiological, aqueous conditions.
Figure 2
Chemical
structures of moieties susceptible to hydrolysis (A) and oxidation
(B) are shown. Hydrolyzable bonds and sites of oxidative attack are
highlighted in red and marked with an asterisk. (C) Ester hydrolysis
may occur chemically (acid or base) or enzymatically. The mechanism
for acid-catalyzed hydrolysis is shown, where the ester bond is cleaved
to yield a carboxylic acid and alcohol byproducts. (D) PVA degradation
is triggered by oxidation of 1,3-diols in the backbone, which can
be catalyzed by either secondary alcohol oxidase (SAO) or periplasmic
PVA dehydrogenase (PDH). Iterative oxidation and further degradation
by aldolase and β-diketone hydrolyase along the PVA backbone
lead to simple byproducts, such as acetic acid. Image adapted with
permission from refs (10) and (11). Copyright
2008 Woodhead Publishing and 2014 Wiley.
Chemical
structures of moieties susceptible to hydrolysis (A) and oxidation
(B) are shown. Hydrolyzable bonds and sites of oxidative attack are
highlighted in red and marked with an asterisk. (C) Ester hydrolysis
may occur chemically (acid or base) or enzymatically. The mechanism
for acid-catalyzed hydrolysis is shown, where the ester bond is cleaved
to yield a carboxylic acid and alcohol byproducts. (D) PVA degradation
is triggered by oxidation of 1,3-diols in the backbone, which can
be catalyzed by either secondary alcohol oxidase (SAO) or periplasmic
PVA dehydrogenase (PDH). Iterative oxidation and further degradation
by aldolase and β-diketone hydrolyase along the PVA backbone
lead to simple byproducts, such as acetic acid. Image adapted with
permission from refs (10) and (11). Copyright
2008 Woodhead Publishing and 2014 Wiley.The rate of hydrolysis depends on the chemical architecture
and morphology of the polymer, as well as the composition and temperature
of the surrounding environment. Degradation rate typically increases
with the frequency of hydrolyzable groups, hydrophilicity, and accessible
surface area (i.e., bulk degradation is faster than surface erosion).[10] Degradation rate typically decreases with increased
crystallinity and cross-linking density, which both limit the rate
of water uptake. Moreover, enzyme-catalyzed degradation tends to occur
via surface erosion, since enzymes are often too large to access degradation
surfaces within the bulk of a polymer.[10] Collectively considering these parameters, degradation times of
common synthetic biodegradable materials can be tuned from a few days
to multiple years.[3,5]Complementary to hydrolysis, oxidation
is a biologically relevant mechanism by which polymers can be broken
down chemically and enzymatically. Activated phagocytes like macrophages,
which play a large role in wound healing, release free radicals in
the form of reactive oxygen or nitrogen species that can initiate
the depolymerization of polymers by oxidation.[10] Ethers, alcohols, aldehydes, amines, phenols, and carbons
substituted by an aliphatic chain, aromatic cycle, or allylic carbons
are all susceptible to oxidative cleavage (Figure B).[10] For instance,
poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) is a biodegradable polymer that consists
of 1,3-diols and can be decomposed by microbial oxidation and enzymatic
hydrolysis eventually to acetic acid byproducts (Figure D).[11] To date, the oxidative mechanism has not been rigorously explored
for electronic polymer applications; still, it is important to note
that the toolkit accessible to materials designers encompasses more
than hydrolyzable linkages.
Biodegradable Polymeric Components
for Organic Electronics
Polymers used in organic electronics
can be divided into two broad categories: (i) insulators and (ii)
conjugated, conducting polymers. Insulators function as the substrates
or dielectrics in electronic devices, whereas conjugated polymers
function as the semiconductors or conductors. The choice of polymer
for the substrate is constrained primarily by compatibility with device
processing, whereas dielectric insulators must also be polarizable
by an electric field. Conjugated polymers can be either semiconducting
or conducting, depending on their Fermi level. The following sections
will discuss the chemical and engineering strategies utilized to overcome
challenges associated with creating the biodegradable counterparts
of these four material types.
Biodegradable Substrates
Substrates typically constitute the majority of the weight in a
device, with micrometer-scale thicknesses compared to other components
that can be hundreds of nanometers thick.[12] Therefore, substrates largely dictate the overall degradation behavior
of a device. Consequently, transient devices have been demonstrated
that incorporate thin, dissolvable layers of inorganic semiconducting
(e.g., Si), dielectric (e.g., SiO2, MgO), and conducting
components (e.g., Mg, Fe) on fully degradable substrates.[12,13] Clearly, selecting substrates with desired degradation profiles
is essential to designing biodegradable devices.The range of
biodegradable, insulating materials that can be used as substrates
is limited by compatibility with the device fabrication processing
steps, necessitating considerations around thermal stability, solvent
compatibility, and mechanical robustness.[14] Device fabrication often involves photolithography and etching processes,
which can expose materials to high temperatures or harsh chemical
solvents. To circumvent these conditions, the target substrate can
by decoupled from the processing steps by transferring devices to
the substrate after fabrication. As an example of this strategy, Hwang
and co-workers demonstrated a general transfer printing method to
fabricate a complementary metal–oxide–semiconductor
(CMOS) array on various synthetic biodegradable substrates, such as
polylactic-co-glycolic acid (PLGA), PCL, and rice
paper (Figure A).[12] The process involved patterning devices on a
sacrificial layer of poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) on silicon,
and then depositing a layer of diluted polyimide (D-PI) on top. By
etching openings in the top D-PI layer, the PMMA layer could be exposed
for dissolution, thus releasing the devices to be retrieved by a PDMS
stamp for transfer to the desired degradable substrate. The authors
used this technique to fabricate a transient hydration sensor made
with dissolvable Si, SiO2, and Mg components on PLGA that
could be used to monitor wound healing, for which adequate hydration
is critical. While the dissolvable inorganic components degraded on
an order of days at physiological conditions (PBS, 37 °C), the
PLGA substrate degraded on the order of months. The authors harnessed
this difference in degradation times to create a robust yet transient
sensor that used the degradation of inorganic elements as the sensing
mechanism. Critically, the authors demonstrated that device performance
before and after transfer to degradable substrates was comparable.[12] Similar transfer-based strategies have also
been reported for transient silicon-based devices on PVA (Figure B), silk, and cellulose.[14−16] The generalizable nature of transfer-based strategies enables substrate
degradation rates to be tuned with relative ease.
Figure 3
(A) Scheme for general
transfer process of devices fabricated on temporary silicon substrates
to a final biodegradable substrate. The transfer method enables a
broad choice of substrate materials, though may suffer from limited
scalability. (B) Photographs displaying the dissolution of a biodegradable
device on a PVA substrate in water over time. Scale bar is 5 mm. (C,
D) Chemical structures of some common biodegradable substrate materials.
Cellulose (C) is a naturally derived material frequently used as a
substrate due to its flexibility and thermal stability. To create
ultrathin cellulose films, it can be processed with sacrificial trimethylsilyl
groups that can be removed via hydrolysis to yield films as thin as
800 nm. Poly(octamethylene maleate (anhydride) citrate) (POMaC) (D)
is a synthetic biodegradable elastomer that can be used as a stretchable
substrate. Images adapted with permission from refs (12, 15, 17, and 23). Copyright 2014 Wiley, 2014 AIP, 2017 National
Academy of Sciences, and 2010 Royal Society of Chemistry.
(A) Scheme for general
transfer process of devices fabricated on temporary silicon substrates
to a final biodegradable substrate. The transfer method enables a
broad choice of substrate materials, though may suffer from limited
scalability. (B) Photographs displaying the dissolution of a biodegradable
device on a PVA substrate in water over time. Scale bar is 5 mm. (C,
D) Chemical structures of some common biodegradable substrate materials.
Cellulose (C) is a naturally derived material frequently used as a
substrate due to its flexibility and thermal stability. To create
ultrathin cellulose films, it can be processed with sacrificial trimethylsilyl
groups that can be removed via hydrolysis to yield films as thin as
800 nm. Poly(octamethylene maleate (anhydride) citrate) (POMaC) (D)
is a synthetic biodegradable elastomer that can be used as a stretchable
substrate. Images adapted with permission from refs (12, 15, 17, and 23). Copyright 2014 Wiley, 2014 AIP, 2017 National
Academy of Sciences, and 2010 Royal Society of Chemistry.Silkworm silk has been extensively explored as
an enzymatically degradable biomaterial because its well-characterized
degradation rate in water can be readily tuned by several orders of
magnitude by controlling its degree of crystallization via β
sheet formation. Highly crystalline, slowly degrading silk tends to
be brittle and difficult to handle, while less crystalline silk tends
to be more flexible, but also incompatible with aqueous processing
steps due to the fast degradation rate. This trade-off typically limits
device fabrication on silk substrates to be performed using transfer
printing methods.[17] Hwang and co-workers
used a transfer printing method to fabricate Si-based microheaters
on silk that degrade after 15 days for transient thermal therapy to
prevent infections after surgery.[13]Papers composed of cellulose nanofibers (CNF) have also been explored
as bioderived, biodegradable substrates. Cellulose is derived from
wood and has the advantages of being flexible, transparent, and stable
at high temperatures (Figure C). Additionally, cellulose substrates have been shown to
degrade slowly, on the order of months, in the presence of naturally
occurring fungi, which suggests that they can be used in consumer
electronics with reduced environmental footprint.[16] While transfer printing methods have been used to fabricate
biodegradable and flexible devices on CNF substrates, direct fabrication
onto substrates is preferred for scalability.[16] The thermal stability of CNF papers enabled Hsieh and co-workers
to directly print and anneal conductive silver lines onto these degradable
substrates, demonstrating its potential for roll-to-roll fabrication.[18,19]Cellulose-based substrates typically exceed multiple micrometers
in thickness, preventing the fabrication of ultrathin devices, which
are desirable for enhanced flexibility and faster degradation. Our
group recently developed a method for producing cellulose substrates
with thicknesses as low as 800 nm. We used trimethylsilyl-functionalized
cellulose, which may be hydrolytically deprotected to reduce the film
thickness by one-third (Figure C). The hydrolyzed cellulose substrates exhibited high thermal
and organic solvent stability, enabling direct fabrication of devices
on cellulose.[17]While the aforementioned
biodegradable substrates may possess flexibility when they are sufficiently
thin, improved integration with dynamic surfaces necessitates the
development of substrates that are stretchable and elastic.[20,21] Such considerations are particularly significant for wearable and
implantable electronics, which may need to adhere to dynamic surfaces
like the heart and brain. For these purposes, polyester-based elastomers
cross-linked with ester bonds, such as poly(diol citrates) and poly(glycerol
sebacate) (PGS), are attractive synthetic biodegradable substrates
derived from natural materials such as citric acid.[22,23] Stretchable, transient Si-based pH and electrophysiological sensors
were fabricated from poly(1,8-octanediol-co-citrate)
(POC) using transfer printing, and complete dissolution was observed
upon immersion in PBS (pH 10) at room temperature after 12 h.[24] To obviate the need for long thermal condensation
curing, these elastomers can additionally be made photo-cross-linkable
by introducing maleic anhydride, yielding poly(octamethylene maleate
(anhydride) citrate) (POMaC) (Figure D).[23] Similar strategies
can be utilized with other synthetic degradable polymers to broaden
the range of materials available to make stretchable and degradable
substrates.[25,26]
Biodegradable
Dielectrics
Dielectric polymers are insulators that can be
polarized by an electric field. Key figures of merit are dielectric
constant (κ), which should be high or low depending on the application;
low dielectric loss for minimal dissipation of electromagnetic energy;
and high breakdown voltage for stability. Dielectrics are used to
fabricate capacitors, and therefore have important uses in capacitive
sensing and field effect transistors (FETs).In transistors,
a large capacitance per area is desired to enable lower voltage operation.
Capacitance per area is directly proportional to κ and inversely
proportional to the insulator thickness of a defect-free film. Thus,
processing as well as intrinsic material property considerations are
essential to select a proper dielectric. κ depends on the number
of polarizable groups in a material, and has a frequency dependence
in an oscillating electric field attributed to the time dependency
of polarization mechanisms. Often, κ is reported for static
fields, though most electronics actually operate in the high-frequency
regime (>GHz).[27] While high-κ
dielectrics help to prevent significant leakage current when scaling
down FETs, they tend to also have lower switching speeds than low-κ
materials. Additionally, since ac power dissipation is proportional
to capacitance, low-κ dielectrics may be desired to reduce power
consumption.[27] There are a wide variety
of biodegradable materials and engineering methods available to prepare
dielectric materials with tailored properties for particular applications.A general strategy to create biodegradable dielectrics is to incorporate
high-κ fillers into a degradable polymer matrix. Common high-κ
metal oxides include SiO2 (κ = 3.9), aluminum oxide
(Al2O3, κ = 9) and hafnium oxide (HfO2, κ = 25). For example, Al2O3 additives
were used to tune the dielectric constant of degradable cellulose
acetate, resulting in a high κ value of 27.57 at low frequency
(50 Hz) (Figure A).[28] Besides metal oxides, carbon nanotubes also
improved the κ at 1 kHz of a paper made from biodegradable CNFs
to 3198 (Figure B).[29] These composites exhibit general transience
through matrix degradation while achieving tunable dielectric constants.
Figure 4
(A, B)
The dielectric constant of degradable composites can be increased
by incorporating high-κ additives such as Al2O3 (A) and carbon nanotubes (CNTs) (B). (C) DNA can be solution-processed
into thin films by complexing it with cationic surfactants like hexadecyltrimethylammonium
chloride (CTMA). (D) Structures of DNA nucleobases used as thin film
dielectrics in OFETs. (E) Pyramidal microstructures enhance the sensitivity
of capacitive pressure sensors made with the elastomeric dielectric
PGS. Pressure sensor arrays fabricated from these devices are capable
of detecting the presence of a 5 mg grain of rice. Images adapted
with permission from refs (28, 29, 32, 33, and 37). Copyright 2017 Springer, 2016
Royal Society of Chemistry, 2010 Wiley, 2010 Springer, and 2015 Wiley.
(A, B)
The dielectric constant of degradable composites can be increased
by incorporating high-κ additives such as Al2O3 (A) and carbon nanotubes (CNTs) (B). (C) DNA can be solution-processed
into thin films by complexing it with cationic surfactants like hexadecyltrimethylammonium
chloride (CTMA). (D) Structures of DNA nucleobases used as thin film
dielectrics in OFETs. (E) Pyramidal microstructures enhance the sensitivity
of capacitive pressure sensors made with the elastomeric dielectric
PGS. Pressure sensor arrays fabricated from these devices are capable
of detecting the presence of a 5 mg grain of rice. Images adapted
with permission from refs (28, 29, 32, 33, and 37). Copyright 2017 Springer, 2016
Royal Society of Chemistry, 2010 Wiley, 2010 Springer, and 2015 Wiley.To circumvent the use of inorganic
fillers, plant-based fibers (e.g., cotton, jute, bamboo, and banana
fibers) are natural polymers that intrinsically possess practical
dielectric properties. Plant-based fibers consist primarily of cellulose
and lignin, which contain abundant free hydroxyl groups that impart
polarity, resulting in high κ values. For example, cotton fibers
have dielectric constant of 17 in the frequency range 60–1000
Hz.[30] Banana, jute, and bamboo fibers have
also been incorporated into dielectric composites, with dielectric
constant increasing with increased fiber additive content.[31]Sugars like glucose and lactose are also promising natural dielectrics,
exhibiting dielectric constant of 6.35 and 6.55 at 1 kHz, respectively,
high breakdown voltages of 1.5 MV/cm and 4.5 MV/cm, respectively,
and low loss tangent on the order of 10–2 at 100
mHz. Moreover, sugars are effective at forming pinhole-free films
when processed from aqueous and/or DMSO solutions. OFETs fabricated
with sugar dielectrics and fullerene as the semiconductor displayed
minimal hysteresis and had capacitances per area of 6.8 nF/cm2 for lactose and 2.15 nF/cm2 for glucose.[32]DNA and its precursors
have also been explored as gate dielectrics. To render DNA solution-processable
for thin film processing, it can be complexed with the cationic surfactant
hexadecyltrimethylammonium chloride (CTMA) (Figure C).[33−36] However, OFETs with DNA-CTMA dielectrics have significant
hysteresis due to the presence of mobile ion impurities.[32,34] Yumusak and co-workers sought to limit ionic mobility by cross-linking
DNA-CTMA with poly(phenylisocyanate)-co-formaldehyde,
leading to reduced hysteresis and increased mechanical robustness,
though with relatively low capacitance per area of 0.8 nF/cm2.[34] An alternative way to address hysteresis
is to directly use DNA nucleobases, which can be purified and vacuum
processed into films as thin as 2.5 nm since they are small molecules
(Figure D). OFETs
fabricated with vacuum processed thin films of guanine and cytosine
demonstrated low losses in the range of 10–3 at
100 mHz, and dielectric constants and breakdown voltages comparable
to those of glucose and lactose. Notably, high capacitances per area
were achieved in OFETs: 9.25 nF/cm2 for guanine and 13.8
nF/cm2 for cytosine.[32]Besides natural materials, synthetic biodegradable polymers like
PGS also exhibit useful dielectric properties. Elastic materials like
PGS are especially useful for capacitive sensors, since they can more
reversibly withstand compression than more viscoelastic alternatives.
We previously reported fully degradable capacitive pressure sensors
consisting of pyramidal microstructures of PGS as the dielectric sandwiched
between biocompatible electrodes made from corrodible metals Mg and
Fe. Since un-cross-linked PGS is a viscous polymer solution, it can
be readily patterned to form structured dielectrics by thermally curing
after casting into a mold. The highly sensitive pressure sensors can
detect a 5 mg grain of rice (Figure E), with an approximate in vivo degradation
rate of 0.2–1.5 mm per month.[37] Further
ability to tune the mechanical properties of degradable dielectrics
will help enable new sensor designs and stretchable devices that better
conform to dynamic surfaces. Additionally, it should be noted that
most of the aforementioned dielectrics were investigated at relatively
low operational frequencies (
Biodegradable Conductors
Conjugated polymers that have
been doped into a conducting state are used for device interconnects
and contacts. They are typically characterized by their conductivity
(σ). Besides connecting different components within an electronic
circuit, they can also connect electrically responsive entities within
the body, such as neurons and cardiac cells. Since doping is required
to render conjugated polymers conducting, the biocompatibility of
the doping process also needs to be considered. Common conjugated
polymers that are stable in their doped, conducting states are polypyrrole
(PPy), polyaniline (PANI), and poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) (PEDOT),
which has conductivities up to 4.6 × 103 S/cm when
doped with poly(styrenesulfonate) (PEDOT:PSS).[38]Electronic conduction in conducting polymers occurs
across rigid conjugated regions. As a result, highly conductive polymer
films are often brittle and stiff. This inherent mechanical limitation
of conjugated polymers can be overcome since excellent electrical
properties can be achieved at low concentrations of the conjugated
polymer within a composite.[39−41] Analogous to dielectric composites,
one strategy for biodegradable conducting polymers is to blend conjugated
polymers with biodegradable, insulating polymers. Conductive composites
made in this way exhibit type I degradation, and are able to disintegrate
even if the polymers cannot be fully broken down into their monomeric
constituents. Since the electronic component is nondegradable, the
objective is to maximize electrical conductivity while minimizing
the relative concentration of the nondegradable conjugated component.Dispersing conjugated polymer nanoparticles within a biodegradable
polymer matrix is an attractive blending approach, as doping of the
conjugated polymer can be performed orthogonally.[42−44] Distinctive
from biodegradable dielectrics, the conductive filler must be above
the percolation threshold to sufficiently form conduction pathways
within the insulating host. Since minimizing the proportion of nanoparticles
is important to achieve high degradability, this strategy is useful
for applications where high conductivity is not required, such as
moderate electrical stimulation to promote cell growth and tissue
regeneration.[45] Since tissue regeneration
typically occurs on the order of 1 to 2 months, these types of materials
ideally should disintegrate at similar time scales.[42]An early example of conductive composites prepared
by this method involved PPy nanoparticles, which are conductive when
doped by oxidation (Figure E).[46] In 2004, Shi and co-workers
demonstrated upregulation of fibroblast growth on composites of PPy
nanoparticles within poly(d,l-lactic acid) (PDLLA).
The oxidized PPy nanoparticles were emulsion polymerized in the presence
of FeCl3. A conductive network was formed within the PDLLA
matrix due to aggregation of the PPy nanoparticles, and the authors
reported conductivities as high as 1 × 10–3 S/cm with just 3 wt % PPy loading. The composite was able to sustain
a detectable DC current at physiological conditions for 1000 h, approaching
the requirements for tissue engineering.[42]
Figure 5
(A)
SEM image of electrospun PLGA fibers coated with PPy, (B) which show
enhanced growth and stimulation of PC12 cells as compared to noncoated
ones. (C) SEM image of a lyophilized biodegradable hydrogel made from
gelatin grafted with polyaniline. (D) Hyaluronic acid doped PEDOT
(PEDOT-HA) increases the degradation rate of PEDOT-HA/PLLA composites
by introducing additional hydrophilic domains. (E) PPy is doped by
an oxidizing agent like FeCl3. (F, G) Dopant-free conductive
polyurethane (DCPU) comprising aniline oligomers are self-doped by
incorporating dimethylolpropionic acid in the backbone. The resulting
biodegradable elastomers are also highly stretchable. Images adapted
with permission from refs (44, 46, 49, 61, and 64). Copyright 2017 Elsevier, 2015
Springer, 2009 Elsevier, 2014 Royal Society of Chemistry, and 2016
authors of ref (64).
(A)
SEM image of electrospun PLGA fibers coated with PPy, (B) which show
enhanced growth and stimulation of PC12 cells as compared to noncoated
ones. (C) SEM image of a lyophilized biodegradable hydrogel made from
gelatin grafted with polyaniline. (D) Hyaluronic acid doped PEDOT
(PEDOT-HA) increases the degradation rate of PEDOT-HA/PLLA composites
by introducing additional hydrophilic domains. (E) PPy is doped by
an oxidizing agent like FeCl3. (F, G) Dopant-free conductive
polyurethane (DCPU) comprising aniline oligomers are self-doped by
incorporating dimethylolpropionic acid in the backbone. The resulting
biodegradable elastomers are also highly stretchable. Images adapted
with permission from refs (44, 46, 49, 61, and 64). Copyright 2017 Elsevier, 2015
Springer, 2009 Elsevier, 2014 Royal Society of Chemistry, and 2016
authors of ref (64).Similarly, Wang and co-workers
enhanced the neural outgrowth of neuron-like pheochromocytoma (PC12)
cells by culturing on a conductive composite of hyaluronic acid doped
PEDOT nanoparticles (PEDOT-HA) within poly(l-lactic acid)
(PLLA), which had conductivities as high as 4.7 × 10–3 S/cm at 10% nanoparticle loading. The authors characterized the
biodegradation of their composites by investigating both the degradation
rate of the films and the cytotoxicity of degradation intermediate
products. The presence of PEDOT-HA accelerated the degradation of
PLLA by 10% after 8 weeks, which they postulated could be attributed
to increased water penetration due to the hydrophilic domains of HA
(Figure D). Additionally,
they determined that PEDOT-HA/PLLA during degradation showed no significant
cytotoxic impacts on PC12 cell growth and viability. In fact, cell
viability was comparable to if not better than with PLLA alone, since
PLLA hydrolyzes to lactic acid, which is somewhat toxic.[44]Electrospinning is an effective method
for creating 3D connected fibrous porous structures with fiber diameters
ranging from hundreds of nanometers to several micrometers, which
is particularly advantageous for applications involving cell growth.[47,48] Biodegradable conducting scaffolds have been formed by electrospinning
biodegradable polymers and subsequently polymerizing conducting monomers in situ.[49,50] For example, in situ polymerization of pyrrole in the presence of biodegradable PLGA
scaffold led to increased growth and differentiation of PC12 cells
compared to noncoated PLGA controls (Figure A,B).[49] Alternatively,
conducting polymers can also be cospun with biodegradable polymers
to form conducting fibers.[51,52] For instance, PANI
doped with camphorsulfonic acid (CPSA) was cospun with gelatin to
yield fibrous sheets with conductivities up to 2.1 × 10–2 S/cm.[51] Similarly, CPSA-doped PANI cospun
with poly(l-lactide-co-ε-caprolactone)
(PLCL) exhibited conductivities as high as 1.38 × 10–2 S/cm with 30 wt % PANI. Electrical stimulation of fibroblasts and
myoblasts on these conducting fibrous scaffolds enhanced adhesion
and proliferation.[52]Type II biodegradation
may be achieved through conjugation breaking, where flexible but nonconjugated
linkers are introduced along the polymer backbone. Conjugation breakers
have been used to enhance the processability and mechanical properties
of conducting and semiconducting polymers with minimal compromise
to device performance.[53−56] Analogously, type II polymers of short conjugated groups linked
to biodegradable units show decent charge transport characteristics.
Conjugated oligomers may be considered biocompatible degradation products,
since they are small enough to be phagocytized by macrophages that
naturally migrate to implantation sites as part of the body’s
innate immune response.[57,58] To date, type II conducting
polymers do not exhibit conductivities as high as their type I counterparts
(Table ). Due to their
low conductivities, type II conductors that have been developed thus
far are primarily useful for registering and stimulating small bioelectronic
signals. Better control over the chemistry, doping, and morphology
of these materials should help close the gap with type I conductors
and approach the conductivities required for fabricating high-performance
electronics.
Table 1
Conductivities of Various Biodegradable
Conducting Polymeric Materialsa
Type I: Conductive Blends
material system
dopant
conductivity
ref
PANI gelatin nanofibers
camphorsulfonic acid (CPSA)
2.1 × 10–2 S/cm
(51)
PANI electrospun with PLCL
CPSA
1.4 × 10–2 S/cm
(52)
PPy with PCLF (polycaprolactone
fumarate)
anionic dopants: napthalene-2-sulfonic acid
sodium salt and dodecyl benzenesulfonic acid sodium salt
6 × 10–3 S/cm
(50)
PEDOT particles in PLLA
hyaluronic acid
4.7 × 10–3 S/cm
(44)
PPy nanoparticles in PDLLA
oxidation with FeCl3
1 × 10–3 S/cm
(42)
PPy-coated PLGA fibers
oxidation with FeCl3
Rs = 4.7 × 105 Ω/sq
(49)
Type I conductors comprise composites of nondegradable
conducting polymers with electrically insulating degradable polymers.
Type II conductors are achieved by connecting conducting oligomers
with degradable polymer segments via cleavable linkages. In both cases,
dopants are required to achieve practical conductivity values, and
dopants must also be biocompatible.
Type I conductors comprise composites of nondegradable
conducting polymers with electrically insulating degradable polymers.
Type II conductors are achieved by connecting conducting oligomers
with degradable polymer segments via cleavable linkages. In both cases,
dopants are required to achieve practical conductivity values, and
dopants must also be biocompatible.Rivers and co-workers reported a biodegradable polymer
consisting of pyrrole–thiophene–pyrrole trimers and
aliphatic chains linked with ester bonds. Conductivities of 10–4 S/cm with iodine doping were reported, and degradation
products were detected after 2 weeks in PBS at body temperature (37
°C) in the presence of the enzyme esterase. In vivo biocompatibility studies confirmed that both the films and their
degradation products were nontoxic, though the iodine dopant was found
to be cytotoxic.[59] To avoid using iodine,
Guimard and co-workers doped a thiophene oligomer-based copolymer
with nontoxic ions FeCl3 and Fe(ClO4)3. While conductivity measurements were not performed, successful
doping was inferred from redox activity using cyclic voltammetry and
polaron states observed from UV–vis spectroscopy. Crucially, in vitro compatibility studies using Schwann cells demonstrated
nearly 100% cell viability relative to controls.[60]Aniline oligomers are also attractive due to their
relatively simple synthesis.[47] Although
aniline oligomers exhibit lower conductivities than their PPy and
PEDOT counterparts, aniline-based materials doped with CPSA have sufficient
conductivities to serve as conductive scaffolds for tissue engineering
applications. Biodegradable electron-conducting hydrogels have been
fabricated by grafting polyaniline to gelatin and doping with CPSA,
resulting in conductivities around 10–4 S/cm (Figure C).[61] While hydrogels are appropriate as scaffolds, preparation
of thin films is important for integration with standard device fabrication.
Pure aniline pentamer (AP) thin films doped with HCl exhibit conductivity
2 orders of magnitude higher (10–2 S/cm), but have
limited use due to their mechanical rigidity.[62] Combining AP with flexible PLA segments improved mechanical properties
but reduced film conductivities to 5 × 10–6 S/cm,[62] though this value can potentially
be enhanced by tuning the macromolecular architecture.[45,63] For example, Guo and co-workers demonstrated a 4-fold improvement
in conductivity (2 × 10–5 S/cm from 5 ×
10–6 S/cm) when copolymers of AP and PCL were fabricated
with a hyperbranched, rather than linear, design.[63] Similarly, aniline tetramer (TA) side chains grafted onto
a biodegradable poly(ester amide) backbone achieved conductivities
of 8.0 × 10–6 S/cm.[45]Besides biocompatibility issues, the mobility of dopants is
potentially problematic for applications that require relatively long-term
stability, since conductivity dramatically decreases when dopants
leach out. To address this issue, Xu and co-workers synthesized a
multisegment dopant-free conductive polyurethane (DCPU) elastomer
(Figure F). DCPU consists
of aniline trimers linked to biodegradable PCL and the dopant dimethylolpropionic
acid (DMPA) (Figure G). The DCPU conductivities ranged from 10–8 to
10–5 S/cm in the dry state, increasing with higher
dopant content. Soaking in PBS further increased conductivity up to
4.7 × 10–3 S/cm. Degradation rate in aqueous
PBS solution increased with DMPA, since its hydrophilic carboxyl groups
rendered the polymer more hydrophilic. Crucially, while their polymer
degraded to 75.8% of its original mass in PBS after 14 days in the
presence of lipase, the conductivity did not decrease by over an order
of magnitude. This improvement in electronic stability was attributed
to reduced dopant removal due to it being covalently linked to the
conducting polymer.[64]To date, there
is a demand for biodegradable conductors with sufficiently high conductivities
(>10–1 S/cm) to be used as electrodes and interconnects
in devices. The use of corrodible Mg and Fe electrodes has been invaluable
in the initial demonstration of biodegradable devices, though the
range of mechanical properties achievable with these metals is limited.
Advances in the development of intrinsically stretchable/elastic,
highly conductive biodegradable polymeric materials will greatly contribute
to the progress of complex electronics interfaced with dynamic surfaces,
such as human skin.
Biodegradable Semiconductors
Semiconductors are essential to the switching mechanism of organic
transistors, and thus are critical to complex electronic circuitry.
They are typically characterized by their charge carrier mobility
(μi), which represents how quickly a free charge
can move through the material when pulled by an electric field. Mobility
and conductivity (σ) are related by the equation σ = e(nμe + pμh), where n is the concentration
of electrons with mobility μe, and p is the concentration of holes with mobility μh.
Mobility is normally expressed in cm2/V·s and can
be calculated directly from working devices like thin film transistors.
Typical semiconducting polymers are polythiophenes (e.g., poly(3-hexylthiophene),
P3HT)[65] and donor–acceptor copolymers
developed originally for organic photovoltaics (e.g., diketopyrrolopyrroles,
DPP).[66,67]There are fewer reports of biodegradable
semiconductors because the primary target for developing biodegradable
electron-conducting polymers has focused on the detection of electrical
signals in the body. However, degradable semiconductors are required
to fabricate more complex biodegradable device architectures. Many
of the strategies discussed above for making conducting polymers biodegradable
are applicable to semiconducting polymers as well, since both have
similar challenges arising from their conjugated structures.As with conducting polymers, blending has been utilized to generate
semiconductors that exhibit type I degradation. To enhance miscibility
with more polar biodegradable matrices, poly(3-thiophene methyl acetate)
(P3TMA), a derivative of P3HT with carboxylate substituents, was selected
for blending with poly(tetramethylene succinate), PLA, poly(esterurea), and thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU). Stable, freestanding
composite films[68,69] or electrospun fibrous mats[9,70] supported cell adhesion and proliferation. Madrigal and co-workers
observed semiconducting behavior in TPU:P3TMA nanomembranes and further
elucidated the inhomogeneity of conductivities within spin-coated
membranes with conductive AFM. A range of conductivities from 2.2
× 10–5 to 5.2 × 10–6 S/cm was measured, which they attributed to the presence of insulating
TPU. Interestingly, while the TPU:P3TMA mixture had a higher band
gap than P3TMA in solution, the spin-coated polymers had very similar
band gaps (2.35 and 2.32 eV, respectively) due to changes in P3TMA
conformation during spin coating.[71]Electrospinning semiconducting polymers with an insulating, biodegradable
polymer have been thoroughly reported. Degradable fibers of P3HT cospun
with PCL[72] and PLGA[73] have been demonstrated, albeit with lower mobilities due
to grain boundaries arising from macroscopic phase segregation. Electrospun
P3HT nanofibers had a mobility of 1.7 × 10–2 cm2/V·s, whereas blended fibers with 20 wt % PCL
had 1 order of magnitude lower mobility and 50 wt % PCL blends had
2 orders of magnitude lower mobility. As with blended transient conductors,
these semiconducting polymer blends are type I since the semiconducting
component is nondegradable, and the degradation behavior depends primarily
on the matrix material.Recent breakthroughs in understanding
charge transport in semiconducting polymers may serve as inspiration
for future designs of biodegradable semiconducting polymers. Overcoming
the inherent rigidity and stiffness of conjugated semiconducting molecules
and their crystalline, charge-transporting aggregates has been a persistent
challenge for utilizing traditional semiconducting polymers in stretchable
and flexible electronics. In 2013, Noriega, Rivnay, and co-workers
demonstrated that high mobility could be achieved in macroscopically
disordered semiconducting polymers with interconnected aggregates
and efficient local intra- and intermolecular charge transport.[74] In 2015, Wang and co-workers demonstrated that
semiconducting polymers could retain high charge carrier mobility
even when mixed with an insulating polymer matrix.[75] The key to their result was a high resistance to disorder
designed by tuning the semiconductor to form interconnected aggregates
with locally efficient intermolecular charge transport.[74] In principle, the strategy of blending rigid
semiconducting polymers with inert polymers that have favorable properties
can be extended to design materials consisting primarily of an insulating,
biodegradable matrix. Such an approach would entail tuning both the
semiconducting and inert polymer components to achieve the required
interconnected morphology.In the aforementioned examples, biodegradability
is introduced via commonly hydrolyzable linkages like ester bonds.
These linkages can be incorporated within a second component in a
blend, which prevents the semiconductor from being completely degradable,
or they can be directly incorporated into the semiconducting polymer
backbone, which disrupts the conjugation responsible for higher mobilities.
To enable type II biodegradable semiconductors, our group recently
reported the seminal use of reversible imine bonds as conjugated linkages
between DPP and p-phenylenediamine. The DPP-based
semiconducting polymer retains conjugation along the backbone, allowing
for hole mobilities as high as 0.34 cm2/V·s when spin-coated
onto octadecyltrimethoxysilane (OTS) treated SiO2/Si substrates.[17] The imine bonds degrade under acidic conditions
(pH = 4.6), where the byproducts are the aldehyde and amine precursors
(Figure A,B). Devices
fully disintegrated after 30 days, by using cellulose as a substrate,
Al2O3 as dielectric, and Fe electrodes. The
pH of 4.6 is notably milder than that of gastric acid in the stomach
(pH = 1.5–3.5). Therefore, imine-linked semiconductors are
an innovative strategy to generate recyclable semiconductors or electronics
intended to pass through and degrade within the digestive system.[17]
Figure 6
(A) Highly flexible devices made with imine-degradable
semiconductor PDPP-DP on ultrathin cellulose substrates can be transferred
to target surfaces after dissolution of an underlying sacrificial
dextran layer. (B) PDPP-DP contains imine bonds that can hydrolyze
under acidic conditions to corresponding aldehydes and amines. (C)
Chemical structure of indigo, along with a photo of degradable indigo-based
transistors on shellac. (D, E) The comproportionation reaction between
melanin and water has been proposed to explain the doping effect of
water on melanin (D), as evidenced by the observed increase in melanin
conductivity with hydration (E). Images adapted with permission from
refs (17, 76, and 77). Copyright 2017 National Academy of Sciences, 2012
Wiley, and 2012 National Academy of Sciences.
(A) Highly flexible devices made with imine-degradable
semiconductor PDPP-DP on ultrathin cellulose substrates can be transferred
to target surfaces after dissolution of an underlying sacrificial
dextran layer. (B) PDPP-DP contains imine bonds that can hydrolyze
under acidic conditions to corresponding aldehydes and amines. (C)
Chemical structure of indigo, along with a photo of degradable indigo-based
transistors on shellac. (D, E) The comproportionation reaction between
melanin and water has been proposed to explain the doping effect of
water on melanin (D), as evidenced by the observed increase in melanin
conductivity with hydration (E). Images adapted with permission from
refs (17, 76, and 77). Copyright 2017 National Academy of Sciences, 2012
Wiley, and 2012 National Academy of Sciences.Conjugated molecules found in nature could also serve as
future building blocks for biocompatible electronics. Certain conjugated
molecules found in foods and dyes have low toxicity and naturally
defined degradation pathways, which helps ensure the biocompatibility
of degradable devices over their broader life cycle. One of the earliest
reported molecules was the natural dye indigo, which is produced from
the plants Indigofera tinctoria and Isatis
tinctoria. Indigo is a semiconductor with a band gap of 1.7
eV and balanced electron and hole mobilities on the order of 10–2 cm2/V·s. OFETs with fully natural
materials have been fabricated by evaporating thin, crystalline films
of indigo onto natural resin shellac substrate, using aluminum as
a gate and Al2O3 as the dielectric (Figure C).[76]The
natural pigment melanin has also been shown to exhibit electronic
behavior. Eumelanins, a subclass of melanins that constitute the primary
component of skin pigment, are 2D sheet-like structures consisting
of randomly cross-linked and π–π stacked aggregated
oligomers and polymer species formed from monomers 5,6-dihydroxyindole
and 5,6-dihydroxyindole-2-carboxylic acid.[77] Melanin conductivity can vary significantly depending on temperature,
physical form, and hydration state, with fully hydrated melanin exhibiting
conductivities as high as 10–3 S/cm, compared to
10–9 S/cm to 10–8 S/cm in the
dehydrated state.[78] The charge transport
characteristics of eumelanin were explored in 2012 by Mostert and
co-workers, who demonstrated that eumelanin is self-doped upon absorption
of water, which causes a comproportionation reaction that produces
free electrons and protons to impart dual ionic and electronic conductivity
(Figure D,E).[77] Due to the importance of hydration on melanin
conductivity, it is a promising candidate for tissue engineering applications
in the body. Bettinger and co-workers demonstrated fully hydrated
melanin thin films with conductivities of 7 × 10–5 S/cm that enhanced Schwann cell proliferation and PC12 neurite extension in vitro. In vivo observation confirmed
that the melanin implants were nearly fully eroded and resorbed after
8 weeks, which is an appropriate time frame for a regenerative medicine
scaffold.[78]Other notable molecules
include β-carotene, a molecule responsible for the red-orange
color of carrots, and derivatives of anthraquinone, a natural laxative.
β-Carotene has been investigated as a molecular wire with p-type
mobility up to 4 × 10–4 cm2/V·s.[32,79] Anthraquinone derivatives, indanthrene yellow G and indanthrene
brilliant orange RF, registered mobilities of 1.2 × 10–2 cm2/ V·s when used in FETs made entirely of natural
materials, with guanine and adenine as the gate dielectric and caramelized
glucose as the substrate. When Al2O3 was incorporated
into the gate dielectric, the mobility was further increased to 0.015
cm2/ V·s.[32] To better ensure
biocompatibility throughout the degradation life cycle, future work
might consider designing synthetic polymers that incorporate conjugated
biomolecules like β-carotene and anthraquinone into the polymer
chain.
Conclusion
Innovative
chemistries and processing techniques have enabled a wide selection
of both natural and synthetic polymers for use as biodegradable device
components. While numerous bioderived and natural materials exhibit
practicable electronic properties as substrates, dielectrics, and
semiconductors, processing improvements are still needed to enhance
said properties and introduce new functionality like stretchability.
Synthetic materials afford greater control over mechanical properties,
and therefore may be preferable to fabricate flexible and stretchable
degradable devices. With synthetic conjugated polymers, materials
design strategies like conjugation-breaking have been employed to
create semiconductors and conductors with promising mobilities and
conductivities, respectively, though progress remains to make these
properties comparable to their nondegradable counterparts. Finally,
new possibilities exist that utilize unconventional degradable linkages,
as evidenced by the seminal demonstration of a fully conjugated, degradable
semiconducting polymer earlier this year. For future work, it would
be interesting to consider different physiological environments within
the body and elsewhere in nature that are conducive to breakdown mechanisms
beyond simple hydrolysis. For instance, to our knowledge, there have
not been biodegradable electronic polymers created that utilize degradation
mechanisms through the highly reactive oxygen and nitrogen radical
species generated by macrophages upon encountering foreign bodies.
Better understanding the chemistries of different natural and physiological
environments could open the door for biodegradable chemistries that
have yet to be explored with substrate, dielectric, semiconducting,
and conducting polymer systems.
Authors: Clementine M Boutry; Amanda Nguyen; Qudus Omotayo Lawal; Alex Chortos; Simon Rondeau-Gagné; Zhenan Bao Journal: Adv Mater Date: 2015-09-29 Impact factor: 30.849
Authors: Lihong Huang; Jun Hu; Le Lang; Xin Wang; Peibiao Zhang; Xiabin Jing; Xianhong Wang; Xuesi Chen; Peter I Lelkes; Alan G Macdiarmid; Yen Wei Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2007-01-10 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Albertus B Mostert; Benjamin J Powell; Francis L Pratt; Graeme R Hanson; Tadeusz Sarna; Ian R Gentle; Paul Meredith Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2012-05-21 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Brian J Worfolk; Sean C Andrews; Steve Park; Julia Reinspach; Nan Liu; Michael F Toney; Stefan C B Mannsfeld; Zhenan Bao Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 11.205