| Literature DB >> 32549392 |
Bin-Hong Tsai1, Yung-Han Chuang1, Chi-Hui Cheng2, Jui-Che Lin1.
Abstract
Hydrogenated styrenic block copolymers (HSBCs) have been used in medical tubing for many years due to their high clarity, flexibility, kink resistance, and toughness. However, when it comes to blood storage applications, HSBC compounds' market has been limited because of their high hydrophobicity, which may trigger platelet adhesion when contacting with blood. HSBC needs to be physically or chemically modified in advance to make it blood compatible; however, HSBC has strong UV/ozone resistance, thermooxidative stability, and excellent processing capability, which increases the difficulty of the chemical modification process as unsaturated dienes has been converted to saturated stable midblocks. Moreover, medical HSBC-containing compounds primarily make up with the non-polar, hydrophobic nature and benign characteristics of other common ingredients (U.S. Pharmacopeia (USP) grades of mineral oil and polypropylene), which complicates the realization of using HSBC-containing compounds in blood-contacting applications, and this explains why few studies had disclosed chemical modification for biocompatibility improvement on HSBC-containing compounds. Sulfonation has been reported as an effective way to improve the material's blood/platelet compatibility. In this study, hydrogenated tert-butyl styrene (tBS)-styrene-isoprene block copolymers were synthesized and its blends with polypropylene and USP grades of mineral oil were selectively sulfonated by reaction with acetyl sulfate. By controlling the ratio of the hydrogenated tBS-styrene-isoprene block copolymer in the blend, sulfonated films were optimized to demonstrate sufficient physical integrity in water as well as thermal stability, hydrophilicity, and platelet compatibility.Entities:
Keywords: elastic styrenic block copolymer; hydrogenation; platelet compatibility; polypropylene; sulfonation
Year: 2020 PMID: 32549392 PMCID: PMC7361970 DOI: 10.3390/polym12061351
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.329
Figure 1Synthesis scheme for tert-butyl styrene (tBS)-styrene-isoprene block copolymer (tSIS).
Monomer weight ratio for tSIS block copolymer synthesis.
| Styrenic Block (g) | Isoprenic Block (g) | Styrenic Block (g) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Styrene | tBS | Isoprene | Styrene | tBS | |
| tSIS5:5 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 1 | 1 |
| tSIS6:4 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 10 | 1.2 | 0.8 |
| tSIS7:3 | 1.4 | 0.6 | 10 | 1.4 | 0.6 |
| tSIS8:2 | 1.6 | 0.4 | 10 | 1.6 | 0.4 |
| tSIS9:1 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 10 | 1.8 | 0.2 |
Figure 2Reaction scheme for hydrogenation of tSIS copolymer.
The blending ratio of tSEPS and PP.
| tSEPS (g) | PP (g) | Mineral Oil (g) | Total Weight (g) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| tSEPS/PP-0% | 0.0 | 3.0 | 0.3 | 3.3 |
| tSEPS/PP-30% | 0.9 | 2.1 | 0.3 | 3.3 |
| tSEPS/PP-50% | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.3 | 3.3 |
| tSEPS/PP-60% | 1.8 | 1.2 | 0.3 | 3.3 |
| tSEPS/PP-70% | 2.1 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 3.3 |
| tSEPS/PP-100% | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 3.3 |
tSEPS: tSEPS was the one prepared from hydrogenation of tSIS-7:3 (Styrene: tBS = 7:3).
Figure 3Reaction scheme of sulfonation of tSEPS.
Figure 41H-NMR Spectrum of tSIS block copolymer with different ratio of styrene to tBS.
Block molar ratio of tSIS block copolymer.
| tSIS-5:5 | tSIS-6:4 | tSIS-7:3 | tSIS-8:2 | tSIS-9:1 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Styrene: tBS (wt ratio) | 5:5 | 6:4 | 7:3 | 8:2 | 9:1 |
| Styrenic ratio (the*) | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.19 | 0.20 | 0.20 |
| Styrenic ratio (exp*) | 0.19 | 0.19 | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0.22 |
| Styrene: tBS (the*) | 1.54 | 2.31 | 3.59 | 6.15 | 13.85 |
| Styrene: tBS (exp*) | 0.56 | 0.83 | 1.63 | 2.00 | 2.51 |
the*: theoretical molar ratio; exp*: experimental molar ratio.
Figure 5ATR-FTIR of sulfonated tSEPS/PP-70% under different sulfonation times.
Atomic ratio of stSEPS/PP copolymer films.
| C1s (%) | O1s (%) | S2p (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 96.38 | 3.27 | 0.36 |
|
| 97.06 | 2.65 | 0.29 |
|
| 95.28 | 4.02 | 0.70 |
|
| 91.90 | 7.30 | 0.80 |
|
| 91.08 | 8.69 | 0.23 |
Area percentage of S2p peak in stSEPS/PP copolymer films.
| SO3 2p1/2 | SO3 2p3/2 | SO2 2p1/2 | SO2 2p3/2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 171.2 eV | 170.0 eV | 170.3 eV | 169.1 eV | |
|
| 22.18 | 44.36 | 11.15 | 22.30 |
|
| 23.53 | 47.05 | 9.81 | 19.62 |
|
| 29.58 | 59.15 | 3.76 | 7.51 |
|
| 29.81 | 59.62 | 3.52 | 7.04 |
|
| 26.51 | 53.02 | 6.82 | 13.64 |
Figure 6Water uptake of stSEPS/PP films at different blending ratios.
Thermal decomposition temperature for different specimen.
| Styrene: tBS | Tdmax (°C) | tSEPS # (%) | Tdmax (°C) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| tSIS | tSEPS | tSEPS/PP | stSEPS/PP | ||
|
| 393.18 | 452.44 |
| 438.22 | 432.73 |
|
| 391.15 | 448.52 |
| 452.45 | 453.44 |
|
| 381.86 | 441.73 |
| 435.26 | 444.19 |
|
| 391.59 | 440.63 |
| 435.23 | 446.27 |
|
| 384.96 | 449.63 |
| 447.13 | 457.02 |
#: tSEPS used for blending with PP is prepared from tSEPS-7:3.
The stress–strain analysis for different specimen (n = 3).
| Tensile Strength (MPa) | Strain at Break (%) | |
|---|---|---|
|
| 0.46 ± 0.06 | 134.65 ± 5.97 |
|
| 16.87 ± 1.21 | 4.99 ± 0.68 |
|
| 8.13 ± 0.36 | 9.32 ± 0.95 |
|
| 5.11 ± 0.29 | 18.89 ± 5.63 |
|
| 2.78 ± 0.12 | 27.96 ± 0.93 |
|
| 1.08 ± 0.00 | 43.83 ± 4.17 |
|
| 22.45 ± 0.55 | 3.83 ± 0.24 |
|
| 13.19 ± 1.09 | 6.94 ± 0.87 |
|
| 7.21 ± 0.38 | 12.31 ± 0.44 |
|
| 2.06 ± 0.41 | 6.38 ± 0.87 |
|
| 1.15 ± 0.56 | 6.97 ± 0.86 |
#: tSEPS used for blending with PP is prepared from tSEPS-7:3.
Figure 7The SEM micrographs of the platelets adhered onto the blended tSEPS/PP at different blending ratio before and after surface sulfonation.
Figure 8Platelet adhesion density on the blended tSEPS/PP at different blending ratios before and after surface sulfonation.