Tiziana Fuoco1, Maria Cuartero2, Marc Parrilla2, Juan José García-Guzmán2, Gaston A Crespo2, Anna Finne-Wistrand1. 1. Department of Fibre and Polymer Technology, School of Engineering Sciences in Chemistry, Biotechnology and Health, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Teknikringen 56-58, SE 100-44 Stockholm, Sweden. 2. Department of Chemistry, School of Engineering Sciences in Chemistry, Biotechnology and Health, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Teknikringen 30, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
We have developed an innovative methodology to overcome the lack of techniques for real-time assessment of degradable biomedical polymers at physiological conditions. The methodology was established by combining polymer characterization techniques with electrochemical sensors. The in vitro hydrolytic degradation of a series of aliphatic polyesters was evaluated by following the molar mass decrease and the mass loss at different incubation times while tracing pH and l-lactate released into the incubation media with customized miniaturized electrochemical sensors. The combination of different analytical approaches provided new insights into the mechanistic and kinetics aspects of the degradation of these biomedical materials. Although molar mass had to reach threshold values for soluble oligomers to be formed and specimens' resorption to occur, the pH variation and l-lactate concentration were direct evidence of the resorption of the polymers and indicative of the extent of chain scission. Linear models were found for pH and released l-lactate as a function of mass loss for the l-lactide-based copolymers. The methodology should enable the sequential screening of degradable polymers at physiological conditions and has potential to be used for preclinical material's evaluation aiming at reducing animal tests.
We have developed an innovative methodology to overcome the lack of techniques for real-time assessment of degradable biomedical polymers at physiological conditions. The methodology was established by combining polymer characterization techniques with electrochemical sensors. The in vitro hydrolytic degradation of a series of aliphatic polyesters was evaluated by following the molar mass decrease and the mass loss at different incubation times while tracing pH and l-lactate released into the incubation media with customized miniaturized electrochemical sensors. The combination of different analytical approaches provided new insights into the mechanistic and kinetics aspects of the degradation of these biomedical materials. Although molar mass had to reach threshold values for soluble oligomers to be formed and specimens' resorption to occur, the pH variation and l-lactate concentration were direct evidence of the resorption of the polymers and indicative of the extent of chain scission. Linear models were found for pH and released l-lactate as a function of mass loss for the l-lactide-based copolymers. The methodology should enable the sequential screening of degradable polymers at physiological conditions and has potential to be used for preclinical material's evaluation aiming at reducing animal tests.
The
design and synthesis of degradable polymeric materials that
find usability as temporary devices in biomedical applications, such
as drug delivery carriers and scaffolds for tissue engineering, rely
on the ability to program the degradation rate and profile, as well
as the resorption profile to the application needs.[1,2] Degradation
is the process of chemical cleavage of macromolecules to form lower
molar mass products, which, for degradable polymers such as aliphatic
polyesters and in abiotic conditions, occurs through hydrolysis of
the ester bonds. The resorption of aliphatic polyesters in hydrolytic
conditions arises instead from the loss of mass owing to oligomers
and low-molecular-weight products leaving the polymeric matrix and
dissolving in the surrounding environment.[3] Degradation is a function encoded in the chemical structure of polymers,[4] being largely affected by the bulk properties,
shape, thickness, and porosity of the material, together with environmental
factors.[5,6] This implies that for the real and absolute
understanding of the mechanism of degradation and resorption of a
polymer in a specific physiological environment, and therefore, to
get information about the clinical outcome of a material, the degradation
rate and the service lifetime need to be in vivo evaluated.
With the analytical tools available to date, this evaluation is commonly
predicted by means of a series of in vitro assays
that provide information about polymer degradation under simplified
conditions compared to the real physiological environment.Typical in vivo experiments involve a large number
of samples collected from different subjects (animals) that are usually
analyzed over an appropriate time frame (from weeks to years) to get
enough data about the material degradation and resorption process
while operating in the in vivo context.[7] Despite several studies being reported in the
literature for specific polymers,[8−11] limitations arise about the data
that can be obtained because of ethical issues and the inability to
follow the material over time once implanted. Such a kind of experiment
requires that the animals involved in the test have to be sacrificed
at different time scales over the total scaffold implantation time,
with the collected samples being analyzed after their removal from
the subject by standard (and expensive) methods centralized in laboratories.
Altogether, the effectiveness of current approaches is really inconvenient
in terms of the number of sacrificed subjects, time to provide valuable
observations, resources, and compliance with ethical issues although
they are necessary to answer the requirements for regulatory clearance.
Moreover, the current methods prevent sequential and real-time monitoring
of exactly the same sample during the implantation period in one subject,
which may lead to biased interpretations due to results’ variability.Because the scientific community is aware of the need for new tools
for the in vivo and real-time assessment of polymeric
materials’ degradation, some efforts have been recently accomplished
toward the development of approaches based on chemical and physical
sensors. Artzi et al. reported the in vivo degradation
of materials both hydrolytically (poly(ethylene glycol) [PEG]/dextran
hydrogel) and enzymatically (collagen) by fluorescence imagining of
mice at different time scales (ranging from hours to 80 days).[12] For this purpose, the materials were modified
with a fluorescent tag and subcutaneously implanted, and then, the
loss of fluorescence intensity was followed over time. A correlation
between in vitro and in vivo assays
was demonstrated, which in principle allows the in vivo resorption of new materials to be predicted. This approach was successfully
extended to hyaluronan hydrogels for tissue engineering applications,[13] thermosensitive PEGylated polyester hydrogel,[14] and poly(lactide-co-glycolide)
[PLGA] degradation for regenerative medicine applications.[15] Also, fluorescence resonance energy transfer
was implemented to follow the assembly and disassembly of micellar,
thermoresponsive hydrogels consisting of triblock copolymers; the
use of multiple tags allowed tracing the fate of the materials both in vitro and in vivo and at nano- and molecular
levels.[16] Despite the undeniable utility
of these approaches, the chemical modification with fluorescent tags
may affect the physicochemical properties of the polymer and the biological
safety. Non-invasive approaches based on magnetic resonance imaging
have recently been described as methodologies to trace hydrogel degradation,[17,18] while photoacoustic tomography enabled the monitoring of the resorption
of PLGA scaffolds doped with contrast agents.[19]Yu et al. reported on a magnetoelastic-based sensor to wirelessly
monitor the in vitro degradation of polylactic acid
artificial bones.[20] A piece of the artificial
bone is formed by covering a strip containing the sensor by means
of a three-dimensional (3D) printing technique. Then, the degradation
was followed in a different medium, mainly alkaline solution at pH
12 and buffer at physiological pH (7.4), by measuring changes in the
output power of the sensor. Although further in vivo application is claimed, this has not been reported yet. Schoning
and co-workers developed capacitive field-effect sensors prepared
as polymer-modified electrolyte–insulator–semiconductors
for in vitro monitoring degradation of poly(d,l-lactide) [PDLLA].[21,22] However, the approach
is rather complex since (i) the material under study is coated in
an electrochemical cell specifically designed for impedance measurements,
and (ii) it is necessary to assume the equivalent electrical circuit
to interpret the data. While the authors demonstrated the influence
of pH and a lipase enzyme on the degradation profile, this approach
seems difficult to be translated to in vivo applications.
Salpavaara et al. presented inductively coupled passive resonance
sensors embedded in the polymer shell for tracing PLGA copolymers
presenting different degradation profiles.[23] While resonance features were qualitatively compared to conventional
polymer characterization methods, no mathematical definition was provided.
It was simply claimed that the sensors provide easy-to-access information
at the laboratory scale for general screenings.Our rationale
was that to succeed in the development of a real-time in vivo methodology for material degradation monitoring,
it is essential to select the appropriate sensor readout providing
a tangible and quantitative correlation with the physicochemical events
occurring during the degradation and without requiring material labeling
or functionalization. Accordingly, the technique should present appropriate
selectivity for one analyte linked to the degradation process. Advantageously,
electrochemical sensors have largely proved suitability for different
types of decentralized measurements, including the clinical analysis
of sweat, interstitial fluid, and blood with on-body wearable devices.[24−29] Regarding the traced analyte(s), in principle, the best option is
the monitoring of a compound that is released from the implanted material
over time while degrading and which concentration could be directly
correlated to the extent of degradation. For example, aliphatic polyesters,
which are among the most used degradable polymers for biomedical applications,[30,31] usually degrade by hydrolysis of the ester bonds, eventually forming
low-molecular-weight hydroxyl acids as products. Poly(l-lactide)
[PLLA] and relative copolymers degrade indeed, forming l-lactic
acid (or l-lactate) as a final product of the hydrolytic
degradation. l-Lactate represents, therefore, a suitable
analyte to be tracked for the monitoring of their degradation process.
Besides being a product of the degradation, it has also been demonstrated
that the l-lactate released from implanted polymeric scaffolds
has a role in the specific tissue regeneration mechanism, i.e., acting
as a fuel for neurons[32] and regulating
chondrocyte proliferation in cartilage regeneration;[33] its tracking might provide a further understanding of such
biological processes. In addition, because of the formation of carboxylic
groups, the pH of the surrounding environment decreases during degradation
of polyesters.Hence, we rationalized that the assessment of
the in vivo degradation of degradable polyesters
should be possible by means
of l-lactate and pH sensing. Accordingly, our aim was to
utilize pH and l-lactate electrochemical sensors in a series
of in vitro experiments to analyze and monitor the
formation of the final degradation products of polyesters with the
goal to comprehend the physical and chemical changes that occur to
the scaffolds over the degradation time in the service environment.
The purpose was to combine traditional polymer characterization techniques
with electrochemical sensors tracing the release of degradation products.
Thus, we sought to obtain insights into the process of hydrolytic
degradation of aliphatic polyesters at a macromolecular level and
correlate this with new data obtained by the sensors in controlled in vitro environments. This step is a prerequisite to translate
the sensing methodology to the tracing of in vivo performance of degradable devices and, in a near future, bridge
indeed the gap between the in vitro and in
vivo experiments. Models for pH variation and released l-lactate concentration as a function of traditional parameters
(such as mass loss) for the analyzed l-lactide-based copolymers
should enable the screening of degradable polymers at physiological
conditions during preclinical material’s evaluation.
Materials and Methods
Materials
Poly(l-lactide)
[PLLA], resomer L 207 S, poly(d,l-lactide) [PDLLA],
resomer R 207 S, poly(l-lactide-co-glycolide)
[PLGA], resomer LG 824 S, poly(l-lactide-co-trimethylene carbonate) [PLTMC], resomer LT 706 S, and poly(l-lactide-co-ε-caproalctone) [PCLA],
resomer LC 703 S, were purchased from Evonik. Poly(d,l-lactide-co-glycolide) [PDLLGA], PURASORB
PDLG 5010, was purchased from Corbion. Poly(ε-caprolactone),
PCL, average Mn 80 kg mol–1, was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich. All of the polymers were used
as received. Poly(ε-caprolactone-co-p-dioxanone) [PCLDX] was synthesized as previously reported.[34] Phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) tablets were
purchased from Sigma-Aldrich, and before use, fresh buffer solution
(pH = 7.4) was prepared by dissolving each tablet in 200 mL of Milli-Q
water.
Solvent Cast Films
Films for all
of the polymers with a thickness of ∼200 μm were prepared
by casting a polymer solution in CHCl3 at a concentration
of 100 g L–1 in a Petri dish. Samples from the films,
with a mass of about 50 mg, were then cut out and used for in vitro degradation tests.
In Vitro Degradation
Degradation tests were performed
in hydrolytic conditions at 60 °C
over 15–20 days depending on the degradation rate of the polymer.
During this period, four data points were collected; for each data
point, triplicate samples were analyzed. Small films with a mass of
about 50 mg were dried in a vacuum to constant weight before tests.
Afterward, samples were immersed separately in vials containing each
30 mL of sodium phosphate buffer (PBS), pH 7.4, and kept at 60 °C.
The buffer solution was not changed over the degradation time. Films
were withdrawn from the incubation medium at scheduled periods, washed
carefully with distilled water, dried to constant weight to calculate
the mass loss (%), and then analyzed by size exclusion chromatography
(SEC). The incubation medium was used to measure the pH and l-lactate concentration.
Polymer Characterization
Methods
Polymer composition was determined by 1H NMR spectroscopy.
Spectra of polymer samples were obtained in CDCl3 at room
temperature using a Bruker Avance 400 spectrometer (1H:
400.13; 13C: 100.62 MHz) and recorded using Bruker TopSpin
v2.1 software. 1H NMR spectra were referenced to the residual
solvent proton at δ 7.26 ppm. Data processing was performed
using MestReNova v9.0.0 software.Thermal properties of the
as-received polymers and the as-synthesized PCLDX were evaluated by
differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) using aluminum pans and a
Mettler Toledo DSC 1 calibrated with indium. Measurements were performed
under nitrogen flow with a heating rate of 10 °C min–1 from −30 to +220 °C. The DSC data are reported for the
first heating cycle, the glass-transition temperature is taken as
the midpoint ISO, and the melting temperatures are taken as the maximum
value of the endothermic peaks.Number-average molar mass (Mn), mass-average
molar mass (Mw), and dispersity (Đ) were measured by size exclusion chromatography
(SEC). The measurements were performed at 35 °C on a Malvern
GPCMAX system equipped with a refractive index (RI) detector, Viscotek
VE 3580, and three columns, one guard column (PLgel 5 μm Guard,
7.5 × 50 mm2) and two linear columns (PLgel 5 μm
Mixed-D, 300 × 7.5 mm2), using CHCl3 as
the eluent (0.5 mL min–1). Narrow polystyrene standards
with molar mass in the range from 1.2 to 940 kg mol–1 were used for calibration, and the flow rate fluctuations were corrected
using toluene as an internal standard. Reported data are the average
values of at least three measures.The mass loss of the films
over degradation time was calculated
using the equation (eq )where m0 is the
initial mass of the sample and mt is the
mass at the specific time data point. The reported data are the mean
value of three samples.
Electrochemical Measurements
for pH and l-Lactate Quantification
All of the pH
measurements
were accomplished by a glass micro-pH electrode 6.0234.110 (Metrohm
Autolab) coupled to pH-meter station 2.914.0220 (Metrohm Autolab).
Notably, the electrode was calibrated using the manufacturer’s
protocol. l-Lactate measurements were attained by means of
a home-made l-lactate biosensor containing a working electrode
(WE), a reference electrode (RE), and a counter electrode (CE). Screen-printed
electrodes were fabricated on a polyester substrate and based on a
conductive rectangular path (15 × 2 mm2) connected
to a circular portion (diameter of 2.5 mm). The rectangular path was
additionally covered by a rectangular portion of regular adhesive
tape (acquired in 3M). A semiautomatic screen-printed machine (SPR-45
Automated SMT Stencil Printer, DDM Novastar, Inc.) was used. The WE
and CE electrodes were made of carbon ink (CI-2051, Engineered Conductive
Materials, Inc.), being cured at 80 °C for 5 min, while the RE
was fabricated with Ag/AgCl ink (CI-1036, Engineered Conductive Materials,
Inc.), being cured at 100 °C for 10 min. The RE and CE were used
as printed (i.e., Ag/AgCl WE and carbon-based CE), whereas the circular
part of the WE was further modified as reported elsewhere and just
adapting the deposited volumes to the electrode dimensions.[35,36] A volume of 3 μL of 0.1 M potassium ferricyanide in 0.01 M
HCl/0.1 M KCl solution and then the same volume of 0.1 M FeCl3 in 0.01 M HCl/0.1 M KCl solution were added, both drops were
thoroughly mixed by pipetting and allowed to react for 15–20
min to form the Prussian Blue redox mediator. The excess of volume
(not attached to the electrode) was removed, and the surface was rinsed
with 0.01 M HCl by drop-casting. Then, the WE was annealed for 1 h
at 100 °C in an oven. A volume of 1 μL of 30 mg mL–1 solution of the enzyme lactate oxidase (LOx, EC#
1.13.12.4, purchased in Sorachim) in 10 mM phosphate buffer (PBS)
at pH 7.4 was drop-casted on the electrode surface and allowed to
dry at room temperature in the fume hood for 20 min. Subsequently,
1 μL of a solution of 1% chitosan (CHI) in 0.1 M acetic acid
was drop-casted on top of the enzyme layer and allowed to dry at room
temperature in the fume hood for 20 min. The WE electrode was stored
in the fridge at 4 °C, with a lifetime of at least 1 month after
its preparation. Figure a illustrates the l-lactate biosensor prepared as herein
described.
Figure 1
(a) Design of the l-lactate biosensor and the response
mechanism: l-lactate in the solution interacts with the enzyme,
which is physically immobilized in the electrode surface by means
of a chitosan (CHI) layer. The formed hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) is an oxidizing agent of the Prussian Blue film being
reduced at −0.05 V. WE, working electrode; RE, reference electrode;
CE, counter electrode. (b) Sketch of the electrochemical cell for
chronoamperometric measurements. The solution is under constant stirring.
(c) Calibration graph observed for increasing l-lactate concentrations
in saline phosphate buffer. The biosensor exhibited a slope of 1.01
μM nA–1 and an intercept of 45.1 nA with a
limit of detection of 4.5 μM.
(a) Design of the l-lactate biosensor and the response
mechanism: l-lactate in the solution interacts with the enzyme,
which is physically immobilized in the electrode surface by means
of a chitosan (CHI) layer. The formed hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) is an oxidizing agent of the Prussian Blue film being
reduced at −0.05 V. WE, working electrode; RE, reference electrode;
CE, counter electrode. (b) Sketch of the electrochemical cell for
chronoamperometric measurements. The solution is under constant stirring.
(c) Calibration graph observed for increasing l-lactate concentrations
in saline phosphate buffer. The biosensor exhibited a slope of 1.01
μM nA–1 and an intercept of 45.1 nA with a
limit of detection of 4.5 μM.For the calibration of the l-lactate biosensor, the WE,
RE, and CE were placed in a small beaker with an appropriate cap that
allows placing of the electrodes and creating the electrical connections
to the potentiostat (Autolab 302N, purchased in Metrohm Nordic). The
experimental setup is presented in Figure b. For the calibration graph of l-lactate, increasing concentrations were added to a phosphate saline
buffer background (PBS; 10 mM PB and 140 mM NaCl, pH 7.4), while the
electrode runs under the chronoamperometry mode with an applied potential
of −0.05 V. After each l-lactate addition, the steady-state
potential was represented against the concentration. The linear fitting
of the data corresponds to the calibration graph used to calculate
the l-lactate concentration in in vitro experiments
during polymeric scaffold degradation. One example of the observed
calibration graph is present in Figure c. Depending on the degradation degree in the samples,
dilution up to 1:50 was employed to maintain the electrochemical measurements
within the linear range of response (up to 500 μM). Notably,
the linear range of response of the lactate biosensor can be wider
by means of slight changes in the tailoring of the sensing element,
as has already been demonstrated in the literature.[37,38] Thus, in future research toward in vivo measurements,
the needed analytical performances will be easily tuned according
to real lactate concentrations.
Results
and Discussion
Herein, we have selected eight different polyesters
(Table ), which undergo
degradation
by hydrolytic cleavage of ester bonds, and monitored their hydrolysis
to demonstrate the feasibility of pH and l-lactate electrochemical
sensors as effective analytic devices to follow their degradation
profile in real time and at physiological conditions. In particular,
we evaluated PLLA and five of its copolymers with d-lactide
[d-LA], glycolide [GA], ε-caprolactone [CL], and trimethylene
carbonate [TMC] with various compositions but similar Mn, as well as a poly(ε-caprolactone) [PCL] and its
copolymer with p-dioxanone [DX], which was recently
developed by us.[39] These polymers have
different compositions and long-range order of the macromolecules,
which determine diverse physical and thermal properties,[40,41] and therefore, different degradation profiles are expected.[5,42]
Table 1
Structure, Composition, and Thermal
Properties of the Evaluated Polymerse
Determined
by 1H NMR
(CDCl3, 400 MHz).
Determined by SEC (CHCl3, 0.5 mL min–1) versus polystyrene
standards.
Determined by
DSC.
The degree of crystallinity, Xc, was calculated from DSC considering an enthalpy
of fusion for an infinitely large PLLA crystal of 93 J g–1 [53] and for a PCL crystal of 136.1 J g–1.[54]
Not detectable under the experimental
DSC condition used.
Determined
by 1H NMR
(CDCl3, 400 MHz).Determined by SEC (CHCl3, 0.5 mL min–1) versus polystyrene
standards.Determined by
DSC.The degree of crystallinity, Xc, was calculated from DSC considering an enthalpy
of fusion for an infinitely large PLLA crystal of 93 J g–1 [53] and for a PCL crystal of 136.1 J g–1.[54]Not detectable under the experimental
DSC condition used.The
initial chemical composition, molar mass, dispersity, morphology,
and physical state for each polymer were characterized because these
are the key factors that determine the degradation and resorption
rate of the materials.[5] Besides that, the
chemical composition is known to affect hydrolysis kinetics of the
ester bonds as well as material hydrophilicity and solubility in water,
determining both the diffusion degrees of water through the bulk of
the specimen. Additionally, water diffusion strongly depends on the
physical state of the polymer, which determines the free volume and
the mobility of the chains at a macromolecular level, under the experimental
conditions in which the hydrolytic degradation occurs. Thus, given
a certain semicrystalline polymer, it has been generally observed
that its amorphous phase is more prone to water uptake and, as a result,
a faster degradation than the crystalline phase is expected.[1] Moreover, the water uptake increases from the
glassy to the rubbery state, being the degradation rate faster if
the material is above the glass-transition temperature (Tg) at hydrolytic conditions. In this regard, under the
accelerated hydrolytic conditions used in our experiments (T = 60 °C), PLLA is semicrystalline because the experimental T is below both the Tg and melting
temperature (Tm), i.e., the polymer is
brittle and in the glassy state. Indeed, it has been recently reported
that the time necessary for PLA degradation to reach a Mn of 10 kg mol–1 is reduced by more
than a half when the degradation temperature is increased from 40
to 85 °C, therefore crossing the Tg of the material.[43] Nevertheless, models
based on the time–temperature superimposition can be used to
predict the lifetime of materials over a broad range of temperatures,
even involving changes of the physical state due to temperature, such
as glass transition.[1,43]For PDLLA, the experimental T is close to its Tg, while
PLGA, PLTMC, and PCLA are semicrystalline
with a comparable degree of crystallinity (Xc) and in the rubbery state (experimental T above Tg). Finally, PCL and PCLDX are
close to the molten state. The reader is referred to Table for the values of Tg and Tm for each particular
polymer.
Assessment of Hydrolytic Degradation of Biomedical
Polymers by Means of Traditional Methods
The experiments
of hydrolytic degradation were performed using solvent cast films
of each polymer (listed in Table ) in saline phosphate buffer (PBS) at 60 °C over
15–20 days. Models to predict the degradation time at different
temperatures have been reported in the literature.[44] During the entire time frame, the average molar mass decrease
and the mass loss (%) of the polymers were monitored at different
time points, coinciding with the pH and l-lactate detection
using electrochemical sensors in the incubation media. The degradation
process of the aliphatic polyesters is, in the current case, the result
of (i) the abiotic hydrolysis of the ester bonds, which occurs throughout
the bulk of the polymer in a random way, eventually leading to the
formation of low-molecular-weight oligomers that are soluble in water
and able to diffuse out of the matrix, therefore causing (ii) the
resorption of the sample.[1] Accordingly,
to obtain the entire picture of the degradation process, we foresaw
a combination of traditional polymer characterization methods to correlate
molar mass decrease, dispersity, and mass loss with the new outcomes
from the monitoring of the released low-molecular-weight oligomers
by means of electrochemical sensors. All this information is expected
to enable one to discern closer kinetic hydrolysis models, even during in vivo evaluation of the biomedical materials’ degradation
by means of pH and l-lactate measurements. Furthermore, the
approach could be applied to trace any analyte formed during material
degradation as long as a selective sensing methodology is available.Figure presents
the number-average molar mass (Mn) and
dispersity (Đ) over the degradation time for
each polymer at five subsequent time points T0–T4: 0, 5, 10,
15, and 20 days for PLLA, PDLLA, PLTMC, PCLA, and PCL; 0, 5, 7, 10,
and 15 days for PLGA and PCLDX, and 0, 2, 5, 7, and 10 days for PDLLGA
(the reader is referred to Table S1 for
the values of Mn and Đ). As observed, PLLA and the relative copolymers with d-LA,
GA, and CL, namely, PDLLA, PLGA, PDLLGA, and PCLA, showed an abrupt
decrease of the molar mass in the very early stage of degradation
(Figure a), which
is typical of a heterogeneous bulk degradation process caused by random
cleavage of the ester bonds along the macromolecules. Indeed, monomodal
distributions of the molar mass were observed over the degradation
time for all of the polymers, although the dispersity values (Đ) increased from 1.5 up to 5 at the later stage of
degradation (Figure b). Low molar mass oligomers with Mn below
1 kg mol–1 were formed after 15 days for PDLLA and
PLGA and after 5 days for PDLLGA and PLLA. The Mn of PCLA decreased down to 3 and 1.5 kg mol–1 after 15 and 20 days, respectively. For all of these samples, i.e.,
PLLA, PDLLA, PLGA, PDLLGA, and PCLA, the final Mn decrease was indeed more than 98%, as observed in Figure a. Overall, the copolymers
of l- and d,l-LA with GA showed the highest
decrease of molar mass as a consequence of the stronger interaction
with water and the lower energy barrier for the hydrolysis reaction
exhibited by the glycolic units compared to lactic units.[45] Furthermore, in the case of PDLLGA, the hydrolysis
rate was accelerated compared to PLGA, first, because the higher content
in GA (50 against 18 mol %) favors both the hydrolysis of the esters
and the water uptake capacity of the PDLLGA and, second, the amorphous
state of the PDLLGA leads to an even higher water uptake capacity.[46]
Figure 2
(a) Number-average molar mass, Mn,
and (b) dispersity, Đ, values of the polymers
over degradation time. T0–T4 are, respectively, 0, 5, 10, 15,
and 20 days for PLLA, PDLLA, PLTMC, PCLA, and PCL; 0, 5, 7, 10, and
15 days for PLGA and PCLDX; and 0, 2, 5, 7, and 10 days for PDLLGA.
Figure 3
(a) Number-average molar mass decrease, Mn (%), and (b) mass loss (%) of the polymers over degradation
time. (c) Kinetic model for the hydrolysis of the polymers over degradation
time.
(a) Number-average molar mass, Mn,
and (b) dispersity, Đ, values of the polymers
over degradation time. T0–T4 are, respectively, 0, 5, 10, 15,
and 20 days for PLLA, PDLLA, PLTMC, PCLA, and PCL; 0, 5, 7, 10, and
15 days for PLGA and PCLDX; and 0, 2, 5, 7, and 10 days for PDLLGA.(a) Number-average molar mass decrease, Mn (%), and (b) mass loss (%) of the polymers over degradation
time. (c) Kinetic model for the hydrolysis of the polymers over degradation
time.Because of the higher hydrophobicity
and more packed long-range
order of the macromolecules, PCL showed a slower molar mass decrease
than the LA-based copolymers and the PCLDX, for which the inclusion
of DX units enhances the hydrolysis rate with respect to PCL.[39] The Mn decrease
values presented by the PCL and PCLDX samples were 71% after 20 days
and 96% after 15 days, respectively, (Figure a). This points out a closer behavior of
PCLDX to PLLA and the relative copolymers with d,l-LA, GA, and CL (presenting a 98% Mn decrease
as discussed above). PCL additionally displayed faster degradation
than PLTMC, which was indeed the polymer that degraded the slowest:
the Mn was around 90 kg mol–1 after 20 days with an overall decrease of merely 31% (see Figures a and 3a) despite the accelerated degradation conditions utilized
for the experiments. The slower and more homogeneous decrease of molar
mass is a consequence of the presence of TMC units and, therefore,
of the carbonate bonds along the polymer chains. Notably, carbonate
bonds are more hydrophobic and less susceptible to hydrolytic degradation
than the ester bonds, also favoring long-range order of the chains
due to the symmetry of the structure. Both aspects potentially prevent
water uptake. The high content of TMC (40 mol %; see Table ) in the copolymer explains
the slow and homogenous profile of the molar mass decrease after an
induction period of 10 days (Figures a and 3a). Indeed, if the amount
of TMC in a copolymer of l-LA and TMC is ca. 16–21 mol %, it will slow down the heterogeneous bulk degradation
process of PLLA, leading to a more homogenous decrease of the molar
mass and longer retention of the physical properties of the material.[42,47]Aliphatic polyesters usually present a bulk degradation behavior,
and as a consequence of the statistical cleavage of the ester bonds
along the macromolecules, the numbers of both carboxyl and hydroxyl
chain-ends increase over time, while the number of reactive ester
units decreases. Such a mechanism implies that the hydrolysis rate
decreases over the experimental time, and therefore, an exponential
decrease of the molar mass is observed. Thus, a linear correlation
between ln(Mn) and the degradation time
has been proposed as a model for the kinetics of hydrolysis of bulk
degrading polyesters.[48] In this regard,
the plot of ln(Mn) versus time for the hydrolytic degradation of each polymer is presented
in Figure b. In addition,
the apparent rate constants of hydrolysis were extrapolated as the
slope for the fitting of the portions in each data set showing a clear
linearity (see Table S2).Among the
analyzed polymers, the PLTMC, PCL, PCLA, and PDLLGA displayed
the best correlation considering the linear model, thus confirming
the hypothesized bulk degradation behavior. An evident change in the
slope of the curve after 5 days of degradation was observed for the
rest of the polymers (i.e., PLLA, PDLLA, PLGA, and PCLDX). This delay
in degradation is likely ascribed to the decrease in pH together with
a higher concentration of degradation products in the incubation media,
as shown below. Indeed, it has been recently reported that for the
pH medium below 6, the hydrolysis of LA/GA copolymers is slowed down
as a consequence of a decrease of concentration of the hydroxide ions,
which are more effective catalysts than hydronium ions in the hydrolysis
process.[49] It is noticeable that, in the
current experimental conditions, the hydrolysis rate is accelerated
by the higher temperature compared to regular physiological conditions
and, additionally, by the accumulation of degradation products in
the incubation media, being able to autocatalyze the reaction.[50] The incubation media was not changed over the
degradation time with the purpose of monitoring pH changes and l-lactate release over time with the electrochemical sensors
(vide infra).When the hydrolytic degradation rate constants
(days–1) were extrapolated as the slope of the curves
for all of the assayed
polymers, the observed values varied between 0.02 and 1.03 days–1 (see Table S2), with the
degradation rate following the order PLTMC < PCL < PLLA <
PCLDX < PCLA < PDLLA < PLGA < PDLLGA. The relative hydrolysis
rate conjunctly depends on the susceptibility of the ester bonds of
each monomeric unit toward hydrolysis, the water uptake capacity of
the polymer, the hydrophilicity/hydrophobicity ratio in the experimental
reaction conditions (all of these three factors being the constitutional
units in the order glycolic > lactic > caproyl > trimethylene
carbonate),
and on the physical phase of the material at the experimental temperature,
which also affects the water uptake capacity of the material. The
order found for the assayed materials correlates rather well with
these factors.Because of the bulk degradation process, a faster
decrease of molar
mass yields a higher mass loss for the samples over the degradation
time, as observed in Figure c. As a consequence of the lower Mn decrease, PLTMC and PCL were the polymers that showed the slowest
resorption rate, with the measured mass loss being almost negligible
after 20 days. Then, PLLA and PCLA presented a mass loss around 20%
after 20 days, comparable to the observation for PCLDX after 15 days.
Furthermore, polymers presented a higher decrease of Mn, also showing a higher resorption, with the PDLLGA being
the only material with complete mass loss after 15 days. Pictures
of the degraded samples at each time point are presented in Figure . The aspect of each
polymer gives a visual proof of the measured mass loss, whose values
over the degradation time are reported for each of the polymers in Table S3.
Figure 4
Photographs of film samples at given time
points over degradation
time.
Photographs of film samples at given time
points over degradation
time.The relationship between molar
mass decrease and mass loss can
be in principle generalized independent of the polymer’s composition
and expressed as a function of the extent of molar mass decrease to
specific threshold values. Thus, mass loss was below 10% when the Mn of the polymer was higher than ca. 20 kg mol–1, while samples presented a loss of
up to 40% of their mass when the Mn decreased
to ca. 1 kg mol–1. In addition,
as observed for PDLLGA, a decrease of Mn to ca. 100 g mol–1 corresponded
to a mass loss of 80% or above, meaning a complete degradation in
terms of molar mass and a total resorption after 15 days of degradation,
as described above. Seemingly, it is necessary to reach a Mn decrease of ca. 80% to observe
a mass loss of at least 10%, confirming once more the bulk degradation
behavior. Furthermore, mass loss is observed when the random cleavage
of ester bonds occurs to the extent that the molar mass of the oligomers
formed as hydrolysis products reaches a certain value, which is different
and typical for each polymer. This molar mass value is such that the
oligomers are soluble in water and can diffuse out of the polymer
matrix.Specifically, it has been reported that oligomers of
LA were soluble
in water when the number of LA units was less than 13 and, therefore,
when the Mn is lower than 936 g mol–1.[51,52] A similar number has also been
reported for copolymers of LA and GA, for which oligomers containing
12 α-hydroxy acids units were water soluble. On the other hand,
PDLLGA having Mn of 1.7 kg mol–1 has per se the tendency to form water-soluble oligomers,[49] therefore supporting the higher resorption rate
observed for PDLLGA. Then, the negligible mass loss observed for PCL
and PLTMC is evidently a consequence of the lower molar mass decrease.
For such materials, a more substantial decrease would be indeed necessary
before water-soluble oligomers are even formed due to their more hydrophobic
nature.Overall, the evaluated polymers degraded by simple hydrolysis
of
the ester bonds following a bulk degradation behavior. Random chain
scission occurs until lower molar mass chains were formed, which below
a certain value allows for diffusion out of the matrix, hence causing
the resorption of the polymeric sample. The smallest “fragments”
that should be formed, as final products of the hydrolytic degradation,
are the hydroxy acids constituting the macromolecules, as depicted
in Scheme a.
Scheme 1
(a) Mechanism
of Hydrolytic Degradation by Random Chain Scission;
(b) Structure and Relative pKa Value of
the Hydroxy Acids Formed as Final Hydrolysis Products
Monitoring of pH Changes and l-Lactate
Release during Degradation of Biomedical Polymers by Means of Electrochemical
Sensors
Electrochemical detection of pH and l-lactate
was accomplished in each degradation medium after the accelerated
process was stopped for each polymer at each established time point.
We sought to find the correlation between pH and l-lactate
concentration and the information extracted by means of traditional
techniques about hydrolytic degradation and resorption. We aimed at
providing models for such correlations to achieve a methodology for
the real-time monitoring of polymer degradation. The pH of the degradation
medium was measured for all polymer samples at each time point according
to the procedure described in Section . In addition, the concentration of l-lactate
was detected by means of the developed biosensor in the case of the
polymers containing l-LA as a monomeric unit. Accordingly, Figure a,b presents pH and l-lactate concentration over the degradation time (the reader
is referred to Tables S4 and S5 for the
numeric collection of raw pH values and l-lactate concentrations).
As observed, negligible variations in the pH of the incubation media
were displayed over time for PLTMC and PCL (i.e., a pH really similar
to the phosphate buffer initially used as the medium was always measured:
7.4). Then, a slight decrease of less than 0.3 pH units was detected
for PLLA and PCLDX over the entire degradation experiment, while the
decrease for PCLA from the 10th day was slightly higher, with a final
pH of 6.6. In contrast, PDLLA showed an abrupt decrease of the pH
after 10 days of degradation, whereas for PLGA and PDLLGA, the pH
started to drop after 5 and 2 days of degradation time, reaching final
pH values of 3.8 and 3.3, respectively.
Figure 5
(a) pH and (b) l-lactate concentration in the incubation
media as measured by electrochemical sensors over degradation time.
(c) pH variation as a function of the l-lactide concentration.
(d) l-Lactate release (%) normalized to each polymer composition
as a function of the degradation time.
(a) pH and (b) l-lactate concentration in the incubation
media as measured by electrochemical sensors over degradation time.
(c) pH variation as a function of the l-lactide concentration.
(d) l-Lactate release (%) normalized to each polymer composition
as a function of the degradation time.In view of these results, the decrease of the pH can be correlated
to both the type and concentration of hydroxy acids released from
the polymer sample over the degradation process. Notably, the concentration
of the −COOH group formed in the medium, which is in principle
responsible for the pH decrease, is a direct consequence of the number
of chain scissions that have occurred for each polymer. Furthermore,
the number of chain scissions determines the concentration of oligomers
that diffuse from the material to the incubation media. Importantly,
an in-depth analysis of the data presented in Figure a revealed that the trends found in pH variation
also depend on the pKa values of the relative
hydroxyl acids formed (see Scheme b): lower final pH values were detected for polymers
comprising GA and LA as constitutional units, for which the pKa values are indeed the lowest ones. Then, on
the basis of the pH value detected after 15 days of degradation time
for the PLGA, it may be hypothesized that the degradation products
exist as protonated species rather than as carboxylates. The same
occurs for the PDLLGA after 7 days of degradation. Evidently, the
higher pKa value of longer alkyl-chain
acids is the reason for the minor pH decrease detected for the PCLDX,
despite a Mn decrease of 96%.The
concentration of l-lactate was found to increase over
time in agreement with the extent of the hydrolytic degradation of
the polymer (Figure b and Table S5). Thus, the first indications
of the presence of l-lactate were detected on the 5th day
for PLGA and PDLLGA, with these two polymers always presenting higher
concentrations of l-lactate in the medium. Following a different
trend, PDLLA, PCLA, and PLLA showed an abrupt increase in l-lactate concentration after an induction period of 10 days. During
these initial 10 days, the l-lactate concentration in the
medium was close to the limit of detection of the biosensor (4.5 μM).
As observed in Figure b, after the mentioned induction period, the concentration of l-lactate increased rather linearly with time for PLLA and PCLA,
while slight variations from linearity were observed for PDLLA, PLGA,
and PDLLGA. This correlation indeed indicates that the hydrolysis
process involved the more susceptible ester moieties of the d-lactic and glycolic units. Finally, negligible l-lactate
was detected for PLTMC over the entire degradation time, which means
that the l-lactate formed is lower than the limit of detection
of the electrochemical sensor (>4.5 μM) or even null in the
degradation medium, which is in agreement with the lower extent of
degradation of the polymer.Comparing Figure a for the pH changes and Figure b for the concentration of l-lactate released
to the medium, the same trends but in the opposite direction are evident:
i.e., decreasing pH is correlated with l-lactate appearance
in the medium. In this sense, the plot of the pH versusl-lactate concentration is shown in Figure c. Interestingly, the pH seems to follow
a linear function with the l-lactate concentration for the
polymers that are able to form only l-lactic and d-lactic acid as the most acidic species in the incubation media (i.e.,
for PLLA, PCLA, and PDLLA). However, when other acidic species are
also formed, i.e., glycolic acid, a deviation from linearity is observed
(see the trend for PLGA and PDLLGA in Figure c).Besides the degradation rate, the
amount of l-lactate
released in the incubation medium of course depends on the initial
composition of the polymer, specifically on the amount of l-lactide, which was different for the selected polymers (see Table ). Thus, the percentage
of l-lactate released into the medium normalized to the maximum
concentration expected for a total degradation in each polymer was
also calculated (see the Supporting Information for equations) and is reported in Figure d for each polymer over the degradation time.
These data confirmed almost a total degradation of PDLLGA in its constitutional
α-hydroxy acid (80% of the total l-lactate release),
while the presence of longer oligomers in the incubation media was
more likely for the other polymers since the amount of measured l-lactate is lower than the theoretical one calculated from
the initial composition of each polymer.Subsequently, we analyzed
the correlations between the pH and the
percentage of l-lactate release with the mass loss and the Mn of the polymers over degradation time (Figure a,b). As observed
in Figure a, the mass
loss tends to present a threshold value at around 10% of the total
mass of the polymer sample before the pH of the degradation media
substantially drops, following afterward a linear decrease with increasing
mass loss for the most eroding polymers. Indeed, a series of linear
models of the pH as a function of mass loss could be extrapolated
after the induction period for the PLLA and its copolymers (Figure c, equations of the
linear fitting are reported in Table S6). Furthermore, since the mass loss is a function of the extent of
molar mass decrease in the polymer, pH variations were observed when Mn values were below 10 kg mol–1 and abruptly dropped when Mn decreased
to more than about 1 kg mol–1 (Figure b). Indeed, this is in agreement
with the threshold value of molar mass already reported for water-soluble
oligomers comprising lactic and glycolic acids units.[51] Consequently, the monitored pH variation provides information
about the resorption of the polymer and could be considered as indicative
of the extent of the chain scission that leads to the formation of
soluble oligomers. Notably, linear models of pH variation as a function
of mass loss could be obtained for slower degrading polymers when
experiments are performed for longer times and until soluble oligomers
are formed. Also, other copolymer compositions could be studied.
Figure 6
(a) pH
and l-lactate release (%) as a function of the
mass loss (%). (b) pH and l-lactate release (%) as a function
of Mn (log scale). (c) Linear models of
pH decrease as a function of mass loss (%) after the induction period
for PLLA, PDLLA, PLGA, PDLLGA, and PCLA. (d) Linear models of l-lactate release (%) as a function of mass loss (%) after the
induction period for PDLLA, PLGA, and PDLLGA.
(a) pH
and l-lactate release (%) as a function of the
mass loss (%). (b) pH and l-lactate release (%) as a function
of Mn (log scale). (c) Linear models of
pH decrease as a function of mass loss (%) after the induction period
for PLLA, PDLLA, PLGA, PDLLGA, and PCLA. (d) Linear models of l-lactate release (%) as a function of mass loss (%) after the
induction period for PDLLA, PLGA, and PDLLGA.Analogous threshold values of mass loss and Mn were identified when inspecting the % of l-lactate
release (Figure b).
The polymers that showed a faster molar mass decrease presented a
relationship between mass loss and Mn with
the increase of l-lactate concentration after an induction:
a series of linear models with increasing mass loss are indeed extrapolated
for PDLLA, PLGA, and PDLLGApolymers (Figure d, equations of the linear fitting are reported
in Table S7). Advantageously, the sensing
of l-lactate enables the monitoring of material degradation
in terms of detection of the final degradation products as a function
of the initial composition, relative hydrolysis, and resorption rate.
The outcomes are indicative of the changes that occur at the macromolecular
level upon degradation, and they are applicable to all of the copolymers
having l-LA as the monomeric unit once the resorption process
has started.Having established pertinent correlations between
pH changes and l-lactate release with traditional observations
related to hydrolytic
degradation and resorption of a representative set of polymers, conveniently,
we found linear models for the pH variation and the l-lactate
released in/to the polymer surrounding that could be extrapolated
as a unique function of the mass loss (Figure c,d; Tables S6 and S7). This is indeed independent of the degradation time and the conditions
utilized to trigger the chain cleavage. Our further hypothesis is
that, when such kinds of models are obtained by in vitro experiments for a particular polymer, the real-time in vivo resorption of the polymer can be determined by measuring the pH
and the l-lactate concentration with electrochemical sensors.
As a result, the methodology presented herein possesses a strong potential
toward the universal in vivo and real-time monitoring
of the degradation process of any kind of polyester material, as long
as selective sensing methodologies to precisely detect the released
compounds during its degradation are available.
Conclusions
It is herein demonstrated the potential for
the electrochemical
detection of pH and l-lactate to establish a route toward
real-time assessment of biomedical polymer degradation. In
vitro data obtained by traditional characterization techniques
and those detecting pH variations and l-lactate released
using electrochemical sensors in the surrounding environment of the
polymers have been correlated. Specifically, two series of linear
models have been found for the variation of pH and l-lactate
as a sole function of the mass loss over degradation time in a set
of l-lactide-based copolymers. These models signify that
the developed methodology has the potential to be further translated
in the preclinical evaluation of biomedical materials. Overall, the
combination of traditional and sensing approaches has provided unique
insights into the in vitro hydrolysis of bulk degrading
polymers: a relationship between the rate of the degradation process
at the macromolecular level, the formation of short oligomers and
hydroxyl acids released as final degradation products, and the material
resorption was concluded. Indeed, the relative rates of the hydrolytic
degradation process were found to be dependent on the copolymer composition,
pKa, of the formed acidic species, hydrophobicity,
and physical state of the polymer material. Besides the tracing of
the resorption profile, the results also demonstrate that the proposed
methodology allows for monitoring of the molar mass decrease of the
polymers although threshold values of Mn have to be reached before correlations with pH variations and/or l-lactate are detected. We envisage that the developed methodology
can be applied to analyze the degradation process of all possible
copolymers of l-lactide with other monomers utilized as biomedical
polymers. Thus, it is expected to support research into existing and
new implantable (and degradable) materials by facilitating a sequential
and comprehensive monitoring of their degradation in the service environment
while reducing currently required resources, especially in terms of
animal tests and cost.
Authors: Harro Antheunis; Jan-Cees van der Meer; Matthijs de Geus; Andreas Heise; Cor E Koning Journal: Biomacromolecules Date: 2010-04-12 Impact factor: 6.988
Authors: Nikolay V Zaryanov; Vita N Nikitina; Elena V Karpova; Elena E Karyakina; Arkady A Karyakin Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2017-10-26 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Marc Parrilla; María Cuartero; Sara Padrell Sánchez; Mina Rajabi; Niclas Roxhed; Frank Niklaus; Gastón A Crespo Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2019-01-04 Impact factor: 6.986