Skip to main content
Log in

In vitro evaluation of biocompatibility of different wound dressing materials

  • Published:
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The in vitro biocompatibility of newly developed wound dressings consisting of different chitosan salts (chitosan lactate, glutamate and chloride) and a chitosan derivative (methylpyroolidinone chitosan) was compared with three commercially available wound dressings made of collagen, calciumalginate, and gelatin, by evaluation in a fibroblast cell culture system. Three experimental models which reflect relevant stages of wound healing were used, and the significant influence of the experimental setting on the results was demonstrated. Collagen and methylpyrrolidinone chitosan were the most compatible materials under the investigated test conditions. Chitosan chloride and glutamate were the least compatible substances. The results indicated that wound dressings made of chitosan lactate and methylpyrrolidinone chitosan as well as the three commercially available dressings are well tolerated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. H. L. WONG and S. M. WAHL, in “Peptide growth factors and their receptors”, edited by M. B. Sporn and A. B. Roberts (Springer, 1990) p. 510.

  2. T. D. TURNER, in “Encyclopedia of pharmaceutical Technology”, Vol. 4, edited by J. Swarbrick and J. C. Boylan (Marcel Dekker, 1991) p. 283.

  3. P. SANDFORD, in “Chitin and chitosan”, edited by G. Skjakbraek, T. Anthonsen and P. Sandford (Elsevier Applied Science, 1989) p. 51.

  4. C. J. BRINE, ibid. p. 679

  5. B. CHITHAMBARA THANOO, M. C. SUNNY and JAYAKRISHNAN, J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 44 (1991) 283.

    Google Scholar 

  6. K. INOUYE, Y. MACHIDA, T. SANNANI and T. NAGAI, Drug Dev. Deliv. 4 (1989) 55.

    Google Scholar 

  7. N. SUJATHA, C. R. SUDHAKARAN and A. PADMANABHAN, Indian J. Pharm. Sci, 53 (1991) 113.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Y. KAWASHIMA, S. Y. LIU, A. KASAI, T. HANDA and H. TAKENAKA, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 33 (1985) 2107.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Y. SAWAYANAGI, N. NAMBU and T. NAGAI, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 30 (1982) 4216.

    Google Scholar 

  10. S. M. UPADRASHTA, P. R. KATIKANENI and N. O. NUESSLE, Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 18 (1992) 1701.

    Google Scholar 

  11. G. BIAGINI, A. BERTANI, R. MUZZARELLI, A. DAMADEI, G. DIBENEDETTO, A. BELLIGOLLI, G. RICOTTI, C. ZUCCHINI and C. RIZZOLI, Biomaterials 12 (1991) 281.

    Google Scholar 

  12. R. MUZZARELLI, G. BIAGINI, A. DAMADEI, A. PUGNALONI and J. DALIO, in: “Industrial polysaccharides: biomedical and biotechnological advances”, edited by V. CRESCENTI, S. STIVALA and J. DEA (Gordon & Breach, New York, 1990) p. 77.

    Google Scholar 

  13. R. MUZZARELLI, M. WECKX and V. BIACHIEGA, Chimicaoggi 4 (1991) 33.

    Google Scholar 

  14. R. MUZZARELLI, T. RENATO, O. FILIPPINI, E. GIOVANETTI, G. BIAGINI and P. E. VARALDO, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 34 (1990) 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. KNAPCZYK, A. B. MACURA and B. PAWLIK, Int. J. Pharm. 80 (1992) 33.

    Google Scholar 

  16. T. MOSMAN, J. Immunol. Meth. 65 (1983) 55.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Berscht, P.C., Nies, B., Liebendörfer, A. et al. In vitro evaluation of biocompatibility of different wound dressing materials. J Mater Sci: Mater Med 6, 201–205 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00146856

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00146856

Keywords

Navigation