| Literature DB >> 34064971 |
Alena Findrik Balogová1, Marianna Trebuňová1, Gabriela Ižaríková2, Ľuboš Kaščák3, Lukáš Mitrík1, Jana Klímová1, Jozef Feranc4, Marcel Modrák1, Radovan Hudák1, Jozef Živčák1.
Abstract
Biopolymers have been the most frequently studied class of materials due to their biodegradability, renewability, and sustainability. The main aim of the presented study was to evaluate degradability of the polymer material blend which was immersed in different solutions. The present study included the production of three different mixtures of polylactic acid and polyhydroxybutyrate, each with a different content of triacetin, which was used as a plasticiser. Applying 3D printing technology, two types of cylindrical specimen were produced, i.e., a solid and a porous specimen, and subjected to in vitro natural degradation. The biodegradation process ran for 195 days in three different solutions (saline, phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), and Hank's solution) in stable conditions of 37 °C and a pH of 7.4, while the specimens were kept in an orbital motion to simulate the flow of fluids. The goal was to identify the effects of a solution type, specimen shape and material composition on the biodegradation of the materials. The monitored parameters included changes in the solution quantity absorbed by the specimens; morphological changes in the specimen structure; and mechanical properties. They were measured by compressive testing using the Inspekt5 Table Blue testing device. The experiment revealed that specimen porosity affected the absorption of the solutions. The non-triacetin materials exhibited a higher mechanical resistance to compression than the materials containing a plasticiser. The final result of the experiment indicated that the plasticiser-free specimens exhibited higher values of solution absorption, no formation of block cracks or bubbles, and the pH values of the solutions in which these materials were immersed remained neutral for the entire experiment duration; furthermore, these materials did not reduce pH values down to the alkaline range, as was the case with the solutions with the plasticiser-containing materials. Generally, in applications where high mechanical resistance, earlier degradation, and more stable conditions are required, the use of non-plasticiser materials is recommended.Entities:
Keywords: 3D printing; biodegradation; biomaterial; polyhydroxybutyrate; polylactic acid; scaffold
Year: 2021 PMID: 34064971 PMCID: PMC8151194 DOI: 10.3390/polym13101542
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.329
Figure 1Schematic presentation of polymer degradation.
Print parameters of individual materials used for the production of specimens (temperature curve, pressure, and speed).
| TAC Content | 0TAC | 5TAC | 10TAC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Heating temperature and time | 230 °C/2 min 200 °C/3 min 190 °C/2 min 185 °C/5 min | 230 °C/2 min 200 °C/3 min 190 °C/2 min | 230 °C/5 min 200 °C/2 min |
| Pressure | Porous: 7.7 bar Solid: 7.1 bar | Porous: 6.5 bar Solid: 7.5 bar | Porous: 6.7 bar Solid: 7.2 bar |
| Print speed | Porous: 1.3–1.6 mm/s Solid: 1.9–2.2 mm/s | Porous: 2.5–2.7 mm/s Solid: 2.1–2.3 mm/s | Porous: 3.5–3.8 mm/s Solid: 3.2–3.5 mm/s |
Changes in pH values during the experiment (saline solution—SS, Hank’s solution—HS, PBS—phosphate-buffered saline).
| Day: | 15 | 30 | 45 | 60 | 75 | 90 | 105 | 120 | 135 | 150 | 165 | 180 | 195 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TAC | ||||||||||||||
| SS | 0 | 6.85 | 6.95 | 6.88 | 6.95 | 6.86 | 6.86 | 6.91 | 6.83 | 6.85 | 6.95 | 6.41 | 6.47 | 6.51 |
| 5 | 7.22 | 7.26 | 7.16 | 7.08 | 7.21 | 7.12 | 4.45 | 5.14 | 4.11 | 4.38 | 4.67 | 4.01 | 4.06 | |
| 10 | 7.23 | 7.13 | 6.50 | 7.00 | 6.55 | 5.41 | 4.63 | 5.08 | 4.51 | 4.63 | 4.77 | 4.87 | 4.99 | |
| PBS | 0 | 7.18 | 7.30 | 7.28 | 7.35 | 7.34 | 7.35 | 7.19 | 7.31 | 7.30 | 7.43 | 7.42 | 7.41 | 7.38 |
| 5 | 7.11 | 7.32 | 7.32 | 7.36 | 7.36 | 7.33 | 7.16 | 7.05 | 6.97 | 7.17 | 7.16 | 7.06 | 7.12 | |
| 10 | 7.08 | 7.34 | 7.29 | 7.31 | 7.26 | 7.19 | 6.89 | 7.10 | 6.85 | 7.07 | 7.14 | 7.20 | 7.22 | |
| HS | 0 | 7.77 | 7.46 | 7.48 | 7.59 | 7.44 | 7.37 | 7.69 | 7.41 | 7.38 | 7.39 | 7.39 | 7.31 | 7.34 |
| 5 | 7.62 | 7.34 | 7.48 | 7.37 | 7.43 | 7.26 | 5.03 | 5.31 | 4.5 | 4.62 | 4.62 | 4.47 | 4.51 | |
| 10 | 7.40 | 7.37 | 7.45 | 6.90 | 6.51 | 6.05 | 4.91 | 5.07 | 4.51 | 4.63 | 4.59 | 4.25 | 4.38 |
Figure 2Curves of changes in the absorption of individual solutions by the specimens.
Figure 3Macroscopic changes in the specimen properties after biodegradation vs. the reference specimens. The effects of absorption of solutions by the specimens on the morphological changes observed during the degradation.
Figure 4Graphical representation of the specimen shapes in terms of their statistical significance.
Measured values of a fibre width and a distance between the two fibres for the individual materials immersed in different solutions.
| Maximum Fibre Width [µm] | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0TAC | Difference | 5TAC | Difference | 10TAC | Difference | ||
| Saline solution | Solid | 1068 | 468 | 797 | 197 | 686 | 86 |
| Porous | 840 | 240 | 551 | −49 | 610 | 10 | |
| PBS | Solid | 1061 | 461 | 803 | 203 | 825 | 225 |
| Porous | 762 | 162 | 675 | 75 | 777 | 177 | |
| Hank’s solution | Solid | 677 | 77 | 740 | 140 | 718 | 118 |
| Porous | 810 | 210 | 623 | 23 | 716 | 116 | |
|
| |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Saline solution | Solid | 158 | 158 | ||||
| Porous | 464 | −136 | 571 | −29 | 534 | −66 | |
| PBS | Solid | ||||||
| Porous | 486 | −116 | 493 | −107 | 451 | −149 | |
| Hank’s solution | Solid | 122 | 122 | 61 | 61 | ||
| Porous | 429 | −171 | 603 | 3 | 436 | −164 | |
Figure 5A–A macroscopic image of a specimen with a visible film formed in its lower part. B–The created 3D model of the central part of the specimen; it is visible that the specimen is no longer porous. C–A 3D analysis of the changes in the specimen surface. D–A polylactic acid and polyhydroxybutyrate (PLA/PHB) 10TAC specimen after degradation in PBS. Visible presence of bubbles and block cracks on the surface of the specimen.
Figure 6Curves of the average values measured during the mechanical compression testing of the individual materials after biodegradation.