Take a sneak peek at the new NIST.gov and let us know what you think!
(Please note: some content may not be complete on the beta site.).
NIST Authors in Bold
|Author(s):||Lisa Pakstis; Alan Zheng; Theodore V. Vorburger; Joy P. Dunkers; Timothy P. Quinn; Marcus T. Cicerone;|
|Title:||Evaluation of Polydimethylsiloxane Modification Methods for Cell Response|
|Published:||February 20, 2009|
|Abstract:||Many methods exist in the literature to modify surfaces with extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins prior to cell attachment. However, there are few studies that systematically compare surface characterization and cell response results among different modification methods. In this work, we compare results from physically adsorbed, chemically attached, and covalently bonded fibronectin and laminin to determine the best method to modify the deformable polydimethylsiloxane elastomer surface. Metrics to evaluate modification methods include amount, uniformity, hydrophilicity and roughness of ECM protein. Cell adhesion, proliferation, morphology and phenotype of vascular smooth muscle were also compared among the different methods.It was found that chemical attachment methods had the highest amount and uniformity of ECM protein over physically adsorbed and chemically bonded, although physical properties among the chemical methods could be very different. All chemical attachment methods gave similar results for cell adhesion, proliferation, area, aspect ratio and phenotype and were superior to physical adsorption. Cell adhesion and proliferation from covalent bonding methods were inferior to chemical attachment.|
|Citation:||Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A|
|Keywords:||biomaterials,cellular response,protein adsorption,surface modification|
|PDF version:||Click here to retrieve PDF version of paper (6MB)|