Next Article in Journal
Research on Power Cyber-Physical Cross-Domain Attack Paths Based on Graph Knowledge
Next Article in Special Issue
Effect of the Printing Scenario on the Dimensional Accuracy and the Tensile Strength of Different Colored PLA Specimens Produced by Fused Deposition Modeling
Previous Article in Journal
A Method for Predicting Indoor CO2 Concentration in University Classrooms: An RF-TPE-LSTM Approach
Previous Article in Special Issue
Assessment of the Development Performance of Additive Manufacturing VPP Parts Using Digital Light Processing (DLP) and Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) Technologies
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Applied Sciences
Volume 14
Issue 14
10.3390/app14146190
applsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Enhancement of Mechanical Properties of PCL/PLA/DMSO2 Composites for Bone Tissue Engineering

by
Kyung-Eun Min
,
Jae-Won Jang
,
Cheolhee Kim
* and
Sung Yi
*
Department of Mechanical and Material Engineering, Portland State University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14(14), 6190; https://doi.org/10.3390/app14146190
Submission received: 5 June 2024 / Revised: 9 July 2024 / Accepted: 9 July 2024 / Published: 16 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing Technology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Bone tissue engineering shows potential for regenerating or replacing damaged bone tissues by utilizing biomaterials renowned for their biocompatibility and structural support capabilities. Among these biomaterials, polycaprolactone (PCL) and polylactic acid (PLA) have gained attention due to their biodegradability and versatile applications. However, challenges such as low degradation rates and poor mechanical properties limit their effectiveness. Dimethyl sulfone (DMSO2) has emerged as a potential additive to address these limitations, offering benefits such as reduced viscosity, increased degradation time, and enhanced surface tension. In this study, we investigate tailored composites comprising PLA, PCL, and DMSO2 to enhance mechanical properties and hydrophilicity. Through material characterization and mechanical testing, we found that the addition of DMSO2 led to improvements in the yield strength, modulus, and hydrophilicity of the composites. PCL and DMSO2 10, 20, and 30 wt% were premixed, and 20 wt% PCL + 10, 20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 were mixed with PLA. Specifically, PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites exhibited higher yield strengths and moduli compared to pure PLA, pure PCL, and PLA/PCL composites. Moreover, the hydrophilicity of the composites increased with DMSO2 concentration, facilitating cell attachment. Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) confirmed the presence of –COOH and –COH bands in PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites, indicating chemical interactions between DMSO2 and the polymer matrix. Fractography analysis revealed enhanced interface adhesion in PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites due to the hydrogen bonding. Overall, this study demonstrates the potential of PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites in bone tissue engineering applications, offering improved mechanical properties and enhanced cell compatibility. The findings contribute to the advancement of biomaterials for additive manufacturing in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine.

1. Introduction

Bone tissue engineering has the potential to aid in the regeneration or substitution of injured bone tissues through the utilization of biomaterials [1,2,3]. Biomaterials are employed across diverse medical and biomedical contexts owing to their distinctive characteristics and harmonization with biological systems [4,5]. Biomaterials must fulfill the requirement of biocompatibility, biodegradability, strength, and durability to be used as structural support in medical implants, which did not cause side effects or rejection by the body [6,7,8,9,10,11,12]. Biomaterials can be gradually resorbed by the body, thus eliminating the need for surgical removal after the tissue regeneration process is complete [13,14]. Polycaprolactone (PCL) and polylactic acid (PLA) are frequently reported as the most promising biocompatible and biodegradable polymers synthesized and were verified as biomaterials by the US Food and Drug Administration [15]. Dimethyl sulfone (DMSO2), well known as an organosulfur compound [16], is a non-hazardous and stable material [15]. In addition, DMSO2 has high surface tension and precise geometric accuracy with low viscosity in additive manufacturing [17].
PCL and PLA have been widely utilized as biomaterials that have gained significant attention in recent years due to their broad range of applications, including biomedical uses [18,19], packaging [20,21,22,23], and 3D printing [24,25]. PCL is a polyester synthesized by the polymerization of the ε-caprolactone monomer, while PLA is a polyester derived from natural sources. PCL and PLA have good biocompatibility, various applications, and easy processing. On the other hand, both PCL and PLA have a low rate of degradation and low melt viscosity, leading to poor flow, low adhesion, and poor dimensional stability. In addition, PLA is relatively brittle [17], and PCL has relatively low strength and stiffness compared to other polymers [17,26]. Several studies have been conducted to investigate the properties of PLA (worked as a matrix) and PCL (worked as an additive) composites. Some studies showed that as PCL content was increased, the modulus and yield strength of PCL/PLA composites were decreased, and toughness was decreased as well [27,28].
Matta et al. [29] studied the rheological, thermal, mechanical, and viscoelastic properties of biodegradable PLA/PCL composites. The elongation, impact toughness, and loss factor decreased compared to pure PLA, while the strength and modulus decreased. SEM analysis showed that PCL was dispersed homogeneously in the PLA matrix. Luyt and Gasmi [30] reported on the influence of PCL on the crystallization behavior of PLA and PCL in various PLA/PCL composites. PCL in the composites significantly impacted the crystallization of PLA. The analysis of successive self-nucleation and annealing regarding PCL crystallization in the composites revealed a notable influence of the presence and quantity of PLA in the composites on the size distribution of crystals in PCL’s primary crystalline fraction. Aliotta et al. [31] researched a micromechanical analysis and the fracture mechanics of various PLA/PCL (from 10 up to 40 wt%) composites. Up to 20 wt% of PCL, debonding occurred, and void growth along the tensile direction occurred. When 40 wt% of PCL was applied, a significant enhancement in the elongation at break occurred due to the predominant shear strength. Hou and Qu [32] studied thermal behavior and mechanical properties. PLA/10 wt% PCL composites exhibited an optimum interfacial adhesion with an elongation at a break of 500.94% and a notched impact strength of 64.31 kJ/m2. However, PCL/PLA composites have a limitation for the low rate of degradation. In order to solve this challenge, dimethyl sulfone (DMSO2) has emerged as an additive to control degradation time.
Dimethyl sulfone (DMSO2) is a naturally occurring organosulfur compound known for its non-hazardous and stable properties [15,33]. DMSO2 has been reported to possess several advantageous properties that can mitigate the drawbacks of PCL/PLA composites, including a reduction in viscosity, an increase in degradation time, and improvements in geometric accuracy and surface tension [8,34,35]. Particularly, high surface tension enhances hydrophilicity, thereby increasing the composite material’s cell-attracting properties within the biomaterial matrix. However, an insufficient reporting of studies on DMSO2, which can potentially alleviate the drawbacks of PCL/PLA composites, has been observed in the existing literature. Recently, Jang et al. [36] studied the material properties of PCL and DMSO2 composites, with PCL acting as the matrix and DMSO2 serving as a filler to customize the composite properties. The study identified a 15.5% decrease in the water contact angle of the PCL/PLA composites compared to the pure PCL and a decrease in yield strength along with an increase in modulus as DMSO2 content was increased. The result was attributed to interface or adhesion challenges between PCL and DMSO2. As a solution, they proposed the addition of a binder that functions as an adhesion promoter to increase the yield strength of PCL/DMSO2 composites.
While various materials based on polymers have been studied, there are still limitations to their applications and manufacturing processes, especially in the context of utilizing biomaterials in additive manufacturing. In addition, the material properties of the composite system comprising a PCL/PLA matrix and DMSO2 filler system have been subject to limited investigation. In this study, the tailored composites of a PLA + 20 wt% PCL + 10, 20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 system were characterized, investigated to enhance mechanical properties, such as yield strength, modulus, and hydrophilicity, and compared to pure PLA, pure PCL, and PLA/PCL composites. The yield strengths, moduli, and hydrophilicities of PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites were increased with the concentration of DMSO2 in the PLA matrix.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

In this study, powder forms of PCL and PLA with a particle diameter of approximately 600 µm and the powder form of DMSO2 with a particle diameter of 300 µm were utilized. The properties of the materials are listed in Table 1. A base composite PLA/20 wt % PCL and 10, 20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 were used. PCL and DMSO2 10, 20, and 30 wt% were premixed, and 20 wt% PCL + 10, 20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 were mixed with PLA. The compositions of PLA, PCL, and DMSO2 are listed in Table 2. The materials were dried at 45 °C under vacuum for one day and physically mixed using an electric grinder at a rotation speed of 500 rpm for 10 min.

2.2. Specimens and Analysis

The specimens for the mechanical experiment and hydrophilicity experiment were fabricated using mold casting. The mold was designed according to the ASTM D790 [37] standard for a three-point bending test. The dimensions of the mold with three cavities were 127 mm × 25.4 mm × 3.2 mm, as shown in Figure 1. The target specimen size was 12.7 mm × 25.4 mm × 3.2 mm for the hydrophilicity experiment and 127 mm × 12.7 mm × 3.2 mm for a three-point bending test.
The powders of PLA, PCL, PLA/PCL composites, and PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites were placed in a mold and heated at 120 °C on a hot plate. Once fully melted, the materials were cooled to 20–25 °C for 2 h.

2.3. Hydrophilicity, Bending Test, Fractography, and Spectroscopy Analysis

Hydrophilicity was assessed through contact angle measurements using the sessile drop method, following the ASTM D7334 standard [38]. Distilled (DI) water was a common test liquid for this evaluation. In the test, a 10 μL droplet of DI water was placed on the specimen, and the angle between the droplet and the specimen was measured at the endpoints on the left and right sides. The test was repeated five times, and the contact angle was calculated as the average of these measurements.
Yield strength (0.2% offset) was determined using a three-point bending test. The tests were conducted using a bench-mounted universal testing machine, model 5ST (Tinius Olsen, Redhill, UK), which has a maximum force capacity of 5000 N and a load measuring accuracy of 0.2% within the range of 0.2% to 100% of the load cell capacity. Yield strength measurements were taken at a strain limit of 5%, with the deflection at the mid-span of the materials reaching 6.8 mm. Nine specimens per composition were tested to obtain the yield strengths.
A SEM analysis of specimen surfaces was conducted to examine the bonding mechanism. Additionally, SEM was employed to inspect the surfaces of the composites and analyze interface adhesion, both in their as-molded state and in cross-sections/surfaces after the bending test. The blade-cut surfaces of specimens were examined at the maximum deflection point following the bending tests. The surfaces of the composites were coated with Au for 4 min using an ion-sputter coater. The SEM analysis was performed using an SNE-4500M Plus system (SEC Co., Ltd., Suwon-si, Republic of Korea), while the surface coating was conducted with an MCM-100P device (SEC Co., Ltd., Suwon-si, Republic of Korea).
A spectroscopy analysis of specimen was performed to investigate chemical structure and composition after SEM analysis. The tests were conducted using FTIR equipment, specifically an iS10 Spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) equipped with a deuterated triglycine sulfate (DTGS) detector and a standard IR light source. Spectra were recorded over the range of 4000–400 cm−1 with a spectral resolution of 4 cm−1. An attenuated total reflectance (ATR) accessory with a diamond crystal was used for all measurements.

3. Results

3.1. Hydrophilicity of Composites

The water contact angles (WCAs) of pure PLA, pure PCL, PLA/PCL composites, and PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites were measured to investigate the hydrophilicity of the composites. The contact angle shapes and results of the composites are shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3.
The hydrophilicity of PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites was better than that of other composites (Figure 2). As the DMSO2 content increases, the water contact angle is also decreased. As shown in Figure 3, the WCAs of pure PLA, pure, PCL, PLA/PCL composites, and PLA/PCL/10, 20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 composites were 86.93° ± 0.60°, 88.52° ± 0.70°, 85.25° ± 0.49°, 81.88° ± 0.37°, 80.49° ± 0.65°, and 76.97° ± 0.29°, respectively. The WCAs of pure PLA, PLA/DMSO2 composites, and PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites decreased by 1.8, 3.7, 7.5, 9.0, and 13% compared to that of pure PCL.
The WCA is one of the critical properties to investigate surface hydrophilicity that significantly influences biological activities, including cell attachment [39]. The WCA can vary depending on the molecular weight of the material, surface treatment, specimen structure, and other factors. In previous studies, the contact angles for PLA, PCL, and PLA/PCL composites were measured to be from 59.46° ± 0.43° to 100.0 ° ± 1.0°, from 75.40° ± 0.35° to 107.0 ° ± 2.0°, and from 66.60° ± 0.19° to 100.0° ± 3.0°, respectively, under various conditions [40,41,42,43,44]. The water contact angles measured in this study for PLA, PCL, and PLA/PCL composites fell within the contact angle ranges reported in previous studies. The contact angles for PLA, PCL, and PLA/PCL composites were observed to be in the following order: PCL > PLA > PLA/PCL composites. This study’s results, showing a decrease in the contact angle for composite materials, are consistent with previous findings [45,46].
A high contact angle, as observed in pure PCL and pure PLA, indicated low surface energy, which hampered the initial adhesion of cells [36,39,47]. DMSO2 showed a decrease in contact angle due to its high surface energy. As DSMO2 was added, the hydrophilicity was improved compared to ones of other composites.
Hydrophilicity can anticipate cell attachment. However, in recent studies, the results indicate that cell attachment cannot be predicted based on only hydrophilicity [48,49,50]. Some studies showed that the water contact angles were not correlated with cell attachment [45,51]. However, many studies have been researching the correlation between water contact angle and cell attachment [40,41,42,43,44,46]. Therefore, various surface modification studies aim to enhance the wettability and cell attachment properties of PLA- and PCL-based surfaces in the literature [52,53].

3.2. Mechanical Properties

The three-point bending tests for the specimens of the composites were conducted, and the stress–strain curves were plotted to determine 0.2% offset yield strengths and moduli for specimens. As shown in Figure 4 and Table 3, the highest yield strength was observed under the PLA/PCL/30 wt% DMSO2 composite specimen. The yield strength for the PLA/PCL/30 wt% DMSO2 composites was 2.81–239.49% higher than that of the other composites. The highest modulus was observed in the pure PLA specimen, and the modulus was 32.90–661.08% higher than that of the other composites. As DMSO2 concentration was increased, yield strengths and moduli were increased.
In a previous study, the natural brittleness, poor elongation at break, and high modulus material for PLA and ductileness, high elongation at break, and low modulus material for PCL were verified [32,54,55]. The yield strengths and moduli for PLA, PCL, and PLA/PCL composites followed the following order: PLA > PLA/PCL composites > PCL. These findings were corroborated by previous research [32].
Yield strengths for pure PLA, pure PCL, and PLA/PCL composites vary from 21.5 MPa to 39.9 MPa, from 10.3 to 19.2 MPa, and from 16.75 MPa to 47.5 MPa, respectively, according to the literature [31,56,57,58,59,60]. The measured yield strengths for PLA, PCL, and PLA/PCL composites in this study were consistent with the yield strength ranges reported in previous studies. The moduli for pure PLA, pure PCL, and PLA/PCL composites were investigated to be about 3000 MPa, 417 MPa, and 2900 MPa, respectively [31,59,61]. The moduli measured in this study exhibited findings comparable to those reported in the literature review.
The elongation of PCL was 227.74% higher than that of PLA. However, the yield strength and modulus of PCL were 137.70% and 661.08% lower than those of PLA, respectively. The yield strength and modulus of PLA/PCL composites increased by 101.24% and 411.32%, respectively, compared to those of pure PCL. However, the elongation decreased by 220.50% compared to that of pure PCL. As the DMSO2 content increased, the elongation increased by 12.50–14.96%, accompanied by increases in yield strength and modulus. Moreover, the elongation and yield strength of PLA/PCL/30 wt% DMSO2 composites increased by 86.75% and 42.84%, respectively, compared to those of PLA.

3.3. Fractography Analysis

The surface and cross-sections of the specimens were analyzed before and after the three-point bending test to investigate the interface adhesion challenges using SEM. The SEM images are shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6.
Figure 5 shows the surface of the composites before the bending test. The surface of the PLA/PCL composites (Figure 5c) transitioned to a rough surface as PCL fillers were added into the PLA matrix. Pure PLA (Figure 5a) and pure PCL (Figure 5b) surfaces exhibited clear surfaces without any defects and agglomeration challenges [19]. However, the surface of the PLA/PCL composites (Figure 5c) became rough due to interface adhesion issues [19,31,62].
The surface of the PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites (Figure 5d–f) transitioned to a smooth surface as the DMSO2 content increased compared to the surface of PLA/PCL composites (Figure 5c). This is the reason why PLA, PCL, and DMSO2 composites were formed through a bonding reaction, whereas PLA and PCL composites were connected by a mechanical anchoring effect [36,63,64].
Figure 6 shows the cross-sectioned surfaces of the composites after the bending test. The cross-sectioned surface of the composites transitioned to a brittle–ductile combination state, characterized by a debonded PCL filler, as PCL was added into the PLA matrix. As shown in Figure 6a, the pure PLA matrix exhibited brittle characteristics, consistent with the references [32,65], and pure PLA demonstrated the highest yield strength and modulus [32,56]. On the other hand, as shown in Figure 6b and the stress–strain curve (Figure 4), the cross-sectioned surface exhibited ductile characteristics, with the matrix being elongated. Figure 6c shows the surface with a brittle–ductile combination characteristic. The PLA/PCL composites showed that the yield strength and modulus exhibited an increase compared to pure PCL, and the composites demonstrated greater ductility than pure PLA, as depicted in the stress–strain curve (S-S curve) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image. In addition, a debonded PCL particle was observed on the PLA matrix, consistent with previous studies by various researchers [19,29,31,32]. In this study, the debonding of the PCL filler on the PLA matrix was confirmed.
The cross-sectioned surface transitioned to a ductile state with an increase in DMSO2 content. Figure 6d depicts a surface with both brittle and ductile characteristics. The brittle characteristics are attributed to PLA/PCL composites, while the addition of DMSO2 induces ductile characteristics. As shown in Figure 6e,f, it is evident that the PLA matrix exhibits significant elongation compared to other composites, excluding pure PCL. The composite surface reveals numerous dimples and regions displaying plastic deformation, indicative of ductile fracture. Moreover, with an increase in DMSO2 concentration, the ductility of the surface also increased. This outcome aligns directly with the enhancement in ductility (elongation) observed during bending tests. The presence of some porosities is attributed to the extraction of PCL particles [57].
Figure 7 shows the FTIR spectra of pure PLA, pure PCL, PLA/PCL composites, and PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites. As shown in Figure 7a–c, the presence of CH2, C=O, CH3, and C–O peaks are indicated. CH2 stretching bands were observed at 2995–2915 cm−1, a C=O stretching band appeared at 1760–1670 cm−1, a CH3 bending band was found at 1480–1346 cm−1, and a C–O stretching band was noticed at 1210–1000 cm−1. As shown in Figure 7d–f, the FTIR spectra were based on the spectrum of PLA/PCL composites, and –COOH bands and –COH bands, based on hydrogen at 1320–1210 cm−1 and 1127–1042 cm−1, respectively, were observed for PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites.
The FTIR spectra of PLA/PCL composites indicated the absence of any chemical bonding reactions. Maleki et al. [66] demonstrated that the FTIR spectra for PLA/PCL composites do not show the presence of any chemical bonding between PLA and PCL. In the results, no new peaks were observed for the PLA/PCL composites in the wavenumber range of 4000–400 cm−1, indicating that PLA and PCL had no chemical interactions or chemical decomposition [66,67,68,69,70].
The bands associated with hydrogen bonding were observed in FTIR spectra analysis for PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites. According to previous studies [71,72,73,74], DMSO or SO2 composites exhibited a –COOH or –OH hydrogen band in a range of 1320–1210 cm−1 or 1366–1294 cm−1, respectively, in the FTIR analysis. In this study, –COOH bands and –COH bands, corresponding to hydrogen stretching vibrations at 1320–1210 cm−1 and 1127–1042 cm−1, respectively, were observed for PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites [64,71,72,75]. The FTIR results confirmed that the hydrogen bonding mechanisms were formed in PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites. The spectra for the PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites revealed the presence of hydrogen bands, and as the DMSO2 content increased, the intensity of these hydrogen bands also increased. Consequently, ductility and yield strength increased, attributed to the enhanced intensity hydrogen bands with an increase in DMSO2 content [76]. Additionally, SO2 can be copolymerized with other polymers to obtain polysulfides, which exhibit excellent properties due to the enriched diversity of polymers [64]. Therefore, the polymerized SO2 could enhance the interface adhesion between PLA and PCL, resulting in improved mechanical properties. However, to identify the detailed bonding mechanisms, further studies are needed through the blend melt mixing process of the composites.

4. Conclusions

In this study, the tailored composites comprising PLA with 20 wt% PCL and 10, 20, and 30 wt % DMSO2 were characterized and investigated to enhance mechanical properties, including yield strength, modulus, and hydrophilicity. The following conclusions were derived:
  • When DMSO2 was added, the hydrophilicity was improved due to its high surface energy. The highest hydrophilicity was observed in the PLA/PCL/30 wt% DMSO2 composite. The contact angle of PLA/PCL/30 wt% DMSO2 composites decreased by 4.57–14.99% compared to other composites. Therefore, in order to enhance the initial cell attachment, the addition of DMSO2 was necessary.
  • As DSMO2 content increased, yield strengths and moduli were increased. The highest yield strength was observed in the PLA/PCL/30 wt% DMSO2 composite specimen. The yield strength was 2.81–239.49% higher than that of other composites. The pure PLA specimen showed brittle behavior, and in the order of PLA/PCL composites, PLA/PCL/10,20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 composites, and pure PCL, ductile behaviors were observed in stress–strain curves.
  • In PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites, hydrogen bonding mechanisms were formed. The pure PLA specimen showed brittle characteristics, and the pure PCL specimen displayed ductile characteristics with the elongated matrix. In PLA/PCL composites, a PCL filler debonding challenge occurred on the PLA matrix. The PLA matrix mixed with PCL and DMSO2 exhibited ductile characteristics with dimple features. Ductility and yield strength increased, attributed to the enhanced intensity hydrogen bands with an increase in DMSO2 content. Therefore, the interface adhesion between PLA and PCL improved, resulting in improved mechanical properties.
For the PLA/PCL/DMSO2 system, as DMSO2 fillers were added and increased, yield strength and modulus were increased compared to other composites except for the pure PLA. Hydrophilicity and ductility were also improved. This study effectively customized the yield strength, hydrophilicity, and ductility for the PLA/PCL/DMSO2 system. Therefore, the newly developed PLA/PCL/DMSO2 composites have the potential to be extended for application as biomaterials in the field of bone tissue engineering.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.-E.M., S.Y. and C.K.; methodology, K.-E.M., J.-W.J., S.Y. and C.K.; investigation, K.-E.M. and J.-W.J.; writing—original draft preparation, K.-E.M.; writing—review and editing, C.K. and S.Y.; project administration, C.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study has been conducted with the support of the Korea Institute of Industrial Technology as “Development of controllable mechanical and biological properties scaffold based on additive manufacturing (KITECH JE-22-0012)”.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Black, C.R.; Goriainov, V.; Gibbs, D.; Kanczler, J.; Tare, R.S.; Oreffo, R.O. Bone tissue engineering. Curr. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2015, 1, 132–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Iranmanesh, P.; Gowdini, M.; Khademi, A.; Dehghani, M.; Latifi, M.; Alsaadi, N.; Hemati, M.; Mohammadi, R.; Saber-Samandari, S.; Toghraie, D. Bioprinting of three-dimensional scaffold based on alginate-gelatin as soft and hard tissue regeneration. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2021, 14, 2853–2864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Jang, J.-W.; Min, K.-E.; Kim, C.; Shin, J.; Lee, J.; Yi, S. Scaffold characteristics, fabrication methods, and biomaterials for the bone tissue engineering. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. 2023, 24, 511–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Salgado, A.J.; Coutinho, O.P.; Reis, R.L. Bone tissue engineering: State of the art and future trends. Macromol. Biosci. 2004, 4, 743–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Amini, A.R.; Laurencin, C.T.; Nukavarapu, S.P. Bone tissue engineering: Recent advances and challenges. Crit. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2012, 40, 363–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hou, Y.; Wang, X.; Yang, J.; Zhu, R.; Zhang, Z.; Li, Y. Development and biocompatibility evaluation of biodegradable bacterial cellulose as a novel peripheral nerve scaffold. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A 2018, 106, 1288–1298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Gabbai-Armelin, P.R.; Souza, M.; Kido, H.W.; Tim, C.R.; Bossini, P.S.; Fernandes, K.R.; Magri, A.M.P.; Parizotto, N.A.; Fernandes, K.P.S.; Mesquit-Ferrari, R.A. Characterization and biocompatibility of a fibrous glassy scaffold. J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med. 2017, 11, 1141–1151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Máca, J.; Vondrák, J.; Sedlaříková, M. Use of Dimethyl Sulfone as Additive in Aprotic Electrolytes. ECS Trans. 2014, 48, 135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Nair, L.S.; Laurencin, C.T. Biodegradable polymers as biomaterials. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2007, 32, 762–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Mitragotri, S.; Lahann, J. Physical approaches to biomaterial design. Nat. Mater. 2009, 8, 15–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Marin, E.; Boschetto, F.; Pezzotti, G. Biomaterials and biocompatibility: An historical overview. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A 2020, 108, 1617–1633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. You, B.C.; Meng, C.E.; Nasir, N.F.M.; Tarmizi, E.Z.M.; Fhan, K.S.; Kheng, E.S.; Majid, M.S.A.; Jamir, M.R.M. Dielectric and biodegradation properties of biodegradable nano-hydroxyapatite/starch bone scaffold. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2022, 18, 3215–3226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Asghari, F.; Samiei, M.; Adibkia, K.; Akbarzadeh, A.; Davaran, S. Biodegradable and biocompatible polymers for tissue engineering application: A review. Artif. Cells Nanomed. Biotechnol. 2017, 45, 185–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Wheelton, A.; Mace, J.; Khan, W.S.; Anand, S. Biomaterials and fabrication to optimise scaffold properties for musculoskeletal tissue engineering. Curr. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 2016, 11, 578–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Hewlings, S.; Kalman, D. Sulfur in human health. EC Nutr. 2019, 14, 785–791. [Google Scholar]
  16. Todo, M.; Park, S.-D.; Takayama, T.; Arakawa, K. Fracture micromechanisms of bioabsorbable PLLA/PCL polymer blends. Eng. Fract. Mech. 2007, 74, 1872–1883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Krishnan, S.; Pandey, P.; Mohanty, S.; Nayak, S.K. Toughening of polylactic acid: An overview of research progress. Polym.-Plast. Technol. Eng. 2016, 55, 1623–1652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Patrício, T.; Glória, A. Mechanical and biological behaviour of PCL and PCL/PLA scaffolds for tissue engineering applications. Chem. Eng Trans. 2013, 32, 1645–1650. [Google Scholar]
  19. Todo, M.; Takayama, T. Fracture mechanisms of biodegradable PLA and PLA/PCL blends. Biomater.-Phys. Chem. 2011, 19, 375–394. [Google Scholar]
  20. Lunt, J. Large-scale production, properties and commercial applications of polylactic acid polymers. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 1998, 59, 145–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Garlotta, D. A literature review of poly (lactic acid). J. Polym. Environ. 2001, 9, 63–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Auras, R.; Harte, B.; Selke, S. An overview of polylactides as packaging materials. Macromol. Biosci. 2004, 4, 835–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Averous, L.; Pollet, E. Environmental Silicate Nano-Biocomposites; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
  24. Yang, S.; Leong, K.-F.; Du, Z.; Chua, C.-K. The design of scaffolds for use in tissue engineering. Part II. Rapid prototyping techniques. Tissue Eng. 2002, 8, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Jariwala, S.H.; Lewis, G.S.; Bushman, Z.J.; Adair, J.H.; Donahue, H.J. 3D printing of personalized artificial bone scaffolds. 3D Print. Addit. Manuf. 2015, 2, 56–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Pitt, C.G. Poly-ε-caprolactone and its copolymers. Drugs Pharm. Sci. 1990, 45, 71–120. [Google Scholar]
  27. Horak, Z.; Fortelny, I.; Kolarik, J.; Hlavata, D.; Sikora, A. Polymer blends. Kirk-Othmer Encycl. Chem. Technol. 2005, 19, 837–881. [Google Scholar]
  28. López-Rodríguez, N.; López-Arraiza, A.; Meaurio, E.; Sarasua, J. Crystallization, morphology, and mechanical behavior of polylactide/poly (ε-caprolactone) blends. Polym. Eng. Sci. 2006, 46, 1299–1308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Matta, A.; Rao, R.U.; Suman, K.; Rambabu, V. Preparation and characterization of biodegradable PLA/PCL polymeric blends. Proced. Mater. Sci. 2014, 6, 1266–1270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Luyt, A.; Gasmi, S. Influence of blending and blend morphology on the thermal properties and crystallization behaviour of PLA and PCL in PLA/PCL blends. J. Mater. Sci. 2016, 51, 4670–4681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Aliotta, L.; Gigante, V.; Geerinck, R.; Coltelli, M.-B.; Lazzeri, A. Micromechanical analysis and fracture mechanics of Poly (lactic acid)(PLA)/Polycaprolactone (PCL) binary blends. Polym. Test. 2023, 121, 107984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Hou, A.-L.; Qu, J.-P. Super-toughened poly (lactic acid) with poly (ε-caprolactone) and ethylene-methyl acrylate-glycidyl methacrylate by reactive melt blending. Polymers 2019, 11, 771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wong, T.; Bloomer, R.J.; Benjamin, R.L.; Buddington, R.K. Small intestinal absorption of methylsulfonylmethane (MSM) and accumulation of the sulfur moiety in selected tissues of mice. Nutrients 2017, 10, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Markaryan, S.A.; Aznauryan, M.; Kazoyan, E. Physicochemical properties of aqueous solutions of dimethyl-and diethylsulfones. Russ. J. Phys. Chem. A 2011, 85, 2138–2141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Loeser, R.F.; Goldring, S.R.; Scanzello, C.R.; Goldring, M.B. Osteoarthritis: A disease of the joint as an organ. Arthritis Rheum. 2012, 64, 1697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Jang, J.-W.; Min, K.-E.; Kim, C.; Wern, C.; Yi, S. PCL and DMSO2 composites for bio-scaffold materials. Materials 2023, 16, 2481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. ASTM D790; Standard Test Methods for Flexural Properties of Unreinforced and Reinforced Plastics and Electrical Insulating Materials. ASTM: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 1997.
  38. D7334-08; Standard Practice for Surface Wettability of Coatings, Substrates and Pigments by Advancing Contact Angle Measurement. ASTM: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2013.
  39. Menzies, K.L.; Jones, L. The impact of contact angle on the biocompatibility of biomaterials. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2010, 87, 387–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Koo, G.-H.; Jang, J. Surface modification of poly (lactic acid) by UV/Ozone irradiation. Fibers Polym. 2008, 9, 674–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Sharifi, M.; Bahrami, S.H.; Nejad, N.H.; Milan, P.B. Electrospun PCL and PLA hybrid nanofibrous scaffolds containing Nigella sativa herbal extract for effective wound healing. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2020, 137, 49528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Herrero-Herrero, M.; Alberdi-Torres, S.; González-Fernández, M.L.; Vilarino-Feltrer, G.; Rodríguez-Hernández, J.C.; Vallés-Lluch, A.; Villar-Suárez, V. Influence of chemistry and fiber diameter of electrospun PLA, PCL and their blend membranes, intended as cell supports, on their biological behavior. Polym. Test. 2021, 103, 107364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Liu, Q.; Jia, H.; Ouyang, W.; Mu, Y.; Wu, Z. Fabrication of antimicrobial multilayered nanofibrous scaffolds-loaded drug via electrospinning for biomedical application. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2021, 9, 755777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Shahverdi, M.; Seifi, S.; Akbari, A.; Mohammadi, K.; Shamloo, A.; Movahhedy, M.R. Melt electrowriting of PLA, PCL, and composite PLA/PCL scaffolds for tissue engineering application. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 19935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Oztemur, J.; Yalcin-Enis, I. Development of biodegradable webs of PLA/PCL blends prepared via electrospinning: Morphological, chemical, and thermal characterization. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part B Appl. Biomater. 2021, 109, 1844–1856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Lu, Y.; Chen, Y.-C.; Zhang, P.-H. Preparation and characterisation of polylactic acid (PLA)/polycaprolactone (PCL) composite microfibre membranes. Fibres Text. East. Eur. 2016, 24, 17–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Agrawal, G.; Negi, Y.S.; Pradhan, S.; Dash, M.; Samal, S. Wettability and contact angle of polymeric biomaterials. In Characterization of Polymeric Biomaterials; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 57–81. [Google Scholar]
  48. Zelzer, M.; Majani, R.; Bradley, J.W.; Rose, F.R.; Davies, M.C.; Alexander, M.R. Investigation of cell–surface interactions using chemical gradients formed from plasma polymers. Biomaterials 2008, 29, 172–184. [Google Scholar]
  49. Herrwerth, S.; Eck, W.; Reinhardt, S.; Grunze, M. Factors that determine the protein resistance of oligoether self-assembled monolayers−internal hydrophilicity, terminal hydrophilicity, and lateral packing density. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 9359–9366. [Google Scholar]
  50. Ostuni, E.; Chapman, R.G.; Liang, M.N.; Meluleni, G.; Pier, G.; Ingber, D.E.; Whitesides, G.M. Self-assembled monolayers that resist the adsorption of proteins and the adhesion of bacterial and mammalian cells. Langmuir 2001, 17, 6336–6343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Celiz, A.; Smith, J.; Patel, A.; Langer, R.; Anderson, D.; Barrett, D.; Young, L.; Davies, M.; Denning, C.; Alexander, M. Chemically diverse polymer microarrays and high throughput surface characterisation: A method for discovery of materials for stem cell culture. Biomater. Sci. 2014, 2, 1604–1611. [Google Scholar]
  52. Haddad, T.; Noel, S.; Liberelle, B.; El Ayoubi, R.; Ajji, A.; De Crescenzo, G. Fabrication and surface modification of poly lactic acid (PLA) scaffolds with epidermal growth factor for neural tissue engineering. Biomatter 2016, 6, e1231276. [Google Scholar]
  53. Oyane, A.; Uchida, M.; Yokoyama, Y.; Choong, C.; Triffitt, J.; Ito, A. Simple surface modification of poly (ε-caprolactone) to induce its apatite-forming ability. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A Off. J. Soc. Biomater. Jpn. Soc. Biomater. Aust. Soc. Biomater. Korean Soc. Biomater. 2005, 75, 138–145. [Google Scholar]
  54. Fortelny, I.; Ujcic, A.; Fambri, L.; Slouf, M. Phase structure, compatibility, and toughness of PLA/PCL blends: A review. Front. Mater. 2019, 6, 206. [Google Scholar]
  55. Wang, Y.; Wang, X.; Zhou, D.; Xia, X.; Zhou, H.; Wang, Y.; Ke, H. Preparation and Characterization of Polycaprolactone (PCL) Antimicrobial Wound Dressing Loaded with Pomegranate Peel Extract. ACS Omega 2023, 8, 20323–20331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Shih, Y.-F.; Huang, C.-C. Polylactic acid (PLA)/banana fiber (BF) biodegradable green composites. J. Polym. Res. 2011, 18, 2335–2340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Zarei, M.; Shabani Dargah, M.; Hasanzadeh Azar, M.; Alizadeh, R.; Mahdavi, F.S.; Sayedain, S.S.; Kaviani, A.; Asadollahi, M.; Azami, M.; Beheshtizadeh, N. Enhanced bone tissue regeneration using a 3D-printed poly (lactic acid)/Ti6Al4V composite scaffold with plasma treatment modification. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 3139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Eshraghi, S.; Das, S. Mechanical and microstructural properties of polycaprolactone scaffolds with 1-D, 2-D, and 3-D orthogonally oriented porous architectures produced by selective laser sintering. Acta Biomater. 2010, 6, 2467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. McKeen, L.W. The Effect of Long Term Thermal Exposure on Plastics and Elastomers; William Andrew: Norwich, NY, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  60. Solechan, S.; Suprihanto, A.; Widyanto, S.A.; Triyono, J.; Fitriyana, D.F.; Siregar, J.P.; Cionita, T. Characterization of PLA/PCL/Nano-Hydroxyapatite (nHA) biocomposites prepared via cold isostatic pressing. Polymers 2023, 15, 559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Farah, S.; Anderson, D.G.; Langer, R. Physical and mechanical properties of PLA, and their functions in widespread applications—A comprehensive review. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2016, 107, 367–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Ostafinska, A.; Fortelny, I.; Nevoralova, M.; Hodan, J.; Kredatusova, J.; Slouf, M. Synergistic effects in mechanical properties of PLA/PCL blends with optimized composition, processing, and morphology. RSC Adv. 2015, 5, 98971–98982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Min, K.-E.; Jang, J.-W.; Yi, S.; Kim, C. Role of binder on yield strength of polycaprolactone/dimethylsulfone composites for bio-applications. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2023, 27, 462–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Yue, T.-J.; Ren, W.-M.; Lu, X.-B. Copolymerization Involving Sulfur-Containing Monomers. Chem. Rev. 2023, 123, 14038–14083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Hendrick, E.; Frey, M. Increasing surface hydrophilicity in poly (lactic acid) electrospun fibers by addition of PLA-b-PEG co-polymers. J. Eng. Fibers Fabr. 2014, 9, 155892501400900219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Maleki, F.; Jafari, H.; Ghaffari-bohlouli, P.; Shahrousvand, M.; Sadeghi, G.M.M.; Alimoradi, H.; Shavandi, A. Proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells on three-dimensional scaffolds made by thermal sintering method. Chem. Pap. 2021, 75, 5971–5981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Åkerlund, E.; Diez-Escudero, A.; Grzeszczak, A.; Persson, C. The effect of PCL addition on 3D-printable PLA/HA composite filaments for the treatment of bone defects. Polymers 2022, 14, 3305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Solechan, S.; Suprihanto, A.; Widyanto, S.A.; Triyono, J.; Fitriyana, D.F.; Siregar, J.P.; Cionita, T. Investigating the Effect of PCL Concentrations on the Characterization of PLA Polymeric Blends for Biomaterial Applications. Materials 2022, 15, 7396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Kemala, T.; Budianto, E.; Soegiyono, B. Preparation and characterization of microspheres based on blend of poly (lactic acid) and poly (ε-caprolactone) with poly (vinyl alcohol) as emulsifier. Arab. J. Chem. 2012, 5, 103–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Chee, W.K.; Ibrahim, N.A.; Zainuddin, N.; Abd Rahman, M.F.; Chieng, B.W. Impact toughness and ductility enhancement of biodegradable poly (lactic acid)/poly (ε-caprolactone) blends via addition of glycidyl methacrylate. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2013, 2013, 976373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Hesse, M.; Meier, H.; Zeeh, B. Spektroskopische Methoden in der Organischen Chemie; Georg Thieme: New York, NY, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  72. Devadoss, V.; Basha, C.A.; Jayaraman, K. Direct Oxidation of Dimethylsulphoxide and Reduction of Maleic Acid in Methanesulphonic Acid Medium. Int. J. Chem. React. Eng. 2009, 7, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Wen, Z.; Kim, W.; Yoo, S.J.; Chae, C.-G.; Seo, H.-B.; Bak, I.-G.; Changez, M.; Lee, J.-S. Highly ordered supramolecular structure built from poly (4-(4-vinylphenylpyridine)) and 1, 1′-ferrocenedicarboxylic acid via hydrogen bonding. Polym. Chem. 2020, 11, 2666–2673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Kulichikhin, V.; Ilyin, S.; Mironova, M.; Berkovich, A.; Nifant’ev, I.; Malkin, A.Y. From polyacrylonitrile, its solutions, and filaments to carbon fibers: I. Phase state and rheology of basic polymers and their solutions. Adv. Polym. Technol. 2018, 37, 1076–1084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Zhao, T.; Sha, F.; Xiao, J.; Xu, Q.; Xie, X.; Zhang, J.; Wei, X. Absorption, desorption and spectroscopic investigation of sulfur dioxide in the binary system ethylene glycol+ dimethyl sulfoxide. Fluid Phase Equilibria 2015, 405, 7–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Baek, J.-H. Change of Properties of Epoxy Resin Blended with the Modified Epoxy; Pukyong National University: Busan, Republic of Korea, 2007. [Google Scholar]
Applsci 14 06190 g001
Figure 1. (a) Mold and (b) specimen size [36].
Figure 1. (a) Mold and (b) specimen size [36].
Applsci 14 06190 g001
Applsci 14 06190 g002
Figure 2. Contact angle shapes of pure PLA, pure PCL, PLA/PCL, and PLA/PCL/10, 20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 composites with DI water.
Figure 2. Contact angle shapes of pure PLA, pure PCL, PLA/PCL, and PLA/PCL/10, 20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 composites with DI water.
Applsci 14 06190 g002
Applsci 14 06190 g003
Figure 3. Contact angle of PLA, PCL, PLA/PCL, and PLA/PCL/10, 20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 composites with DI water.
Figure 3. Contact angle of PLA, PCL, PLA/PCL, and PLA/PCL/10, 20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 composites with DI water.
Applsci 14 06190 g003
Applsci 14 06190 g004
Figure 4. Stress–strain curves of specimens of pure PLA, pure PCL, PLA/PCL composites, and PLA/PCL/10, 20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 composites.
Figure 4. Stress–strain curves of specimens of pure PLA, pure PCL, PLA/PCL composites, and PLA/PCL/10, 20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 composites.
Applsci 14 06190 g004
Applsci 14 06190 g005
Figure 5. As-molded SEM images: (a) pure PLA, (b) pure PCL, (c) PLA/PCL composites, (d) PLA/PCL/10 wt% DMSO2 composites, (e) PLA/PCL/20 wt% DMSO2 composites, and (f) PLA/PCL/30 wt% DMSO2 composites.
Figure 5. As-molded SEM images: (a) pure PLA, (b) pure PCL, (c) PLA/PCL composites, (d) PLA/PCL/10 wt% DMSO2 composites, (e) PLA/PCL/20 wt% DMSO2 composites, and (f) PLA/PCL/30 wt% DMSO2 composites.
Applsci 14 06190 g005
Applsci 14 06190 g006aApplsci 14 06190 g006b
Figure 6. Fractography SEM images: (a) pure PLA, (b) pure PCL, (c) PLA/PCL composites, (d) PLA/PCL/10 wt% DMSO2 composites, (e) PLA/PCL/20 wt% DMSO2 composites, and (f) PLA/PCL/30 wt% DMSO2 composites (red circle: PCL particle debonded and blue circle: PCL particle pulled out).
Figure 6. Fractography SEM images: (a) pure PLA, (b) pure PCL, (c) PLA/PCL composites, (d) PLA/PCL/10 wt% DMSO2 composites, (e) PLA/PCL/20 wt% DMSO2 composites, and (f) PLA/PCL/30 wt% DMSO2 composites (red circle: PCL particle debonded and blue circle: PCL particle pulled out).
Applsci 14 06190 g006aApplsci 14 06190 g006b
Applsci 14 06190 g007
Figure 7. FTIR spectra: (a) pure PLA, (b) pure PCL, (c) PLA/PCL composites, (d) PLA/PCL/10 wt% DMSO2 composites, (e) PLA/PCL/20 wt% DMSO2 composites, and (f) PLA/PCL/30 wt% DMSO2 composites.
Figure 7. FTIR spectra: (a) pure PLA, (b) pure PCL, (c) PLA/PCL composites, (d) PLA/PCL/10 wt% DMSO2 composites, (e) PLA/PCL/20 wt% DMSO2 composites, and (f) PLA/PCL/30 wt% DMSO2 composites.
Applsci 14 06190 g007
Table 1. Material properties of PLA, PCL, DMSO2.
Table 1. Material properties of PLA, PCL, DMSO2.
MaterialsPhase at Room TemperatureMolecular Weight (g/mol)Melting Point (°C)Viscosity at Liquid (mPa·s)Supplier
PLASolid60,000178 ± 2400 @ 215 °CNatureWorks, Waringtion, PA, USA
PCLSolid50,00058 ± 23200 @ 100 °CPolysciences, Waringtion, PA, USA
DMSO2Solid94.13107 ± 21.14 @ 125 °CBergstrom Nutrition, Vancouver, WA, USA
Table 2. The compositions of PLA, PCL, DMSO2.
Table 2. The compositions of PLA, PCL, DMSO2.
Composite NameComposite Ratio in Composites (wt%)
PLAPCLDMSO2
PLA/PCL80200
PLA/PCL/10DMSO280182
PLA/PCL/20DMSO280164
PLA/PCL/30DMSO280146
Table 3. The 0.2% offset yield strength of pure PLA, pure PCL, PLA/PCL composites, and PLA/PCL/10, 20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 composites.
Table 3. The 0.2% offset yield strength of pure PLA, pure PCL, PLA/PCL composites, and PLA/PCL/10, 20, and 30 wt% DMSO2 composites.
Process0.2% Offset Yield Strength (MPa)
(Mean ± Standard Deviation)		Modulus (MPa)
(Mean ± Standard Deviation)
Pure PLA32.56 ± 2.783227.97 ± 147.47
Pure PCL13.7 ± 0.44424.00 ± 2.94
PLA/PCL27.57 ± 4.222168.97 ± 201.30
PLA/PCL/10 wt% DMSO237.81 ± 2.832278.63 ±109.39
PLA/PCL/20 wt% DMSO245.24 ± 3.132330.97 ± 81.72
PLA/PCL/30 wt% DMSO246.51 ± 1.532428.81 ± 26.15
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Min, K.-E.; Jang, J.-W.; Kim, C.; Yi, S. Enhancement of Mechanical Properties of PCL/PLA/DMSO2 Composites for Bone Tissue Engineering. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 6190. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14146190

AMA Style

Min K-E, Jang J-W, Kim C, Yi S. Enhancement of Mechanical Properties of PCL/PLA/DMSO2 Composites for Bone Tissue Engineering. Applied Sciences. 2024; 14(14):6190. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14146190

Chicago/Turabian Style

Min, Kyung-Eun, Jae-Won Jang, Cheolhee Kim, and Sung Yi. 2024. "Enhancement of Mechanical Properties of PCL/PLA/DMSO2 Composites for Bone Tissue Engineering" Applied Sciences 14, no. 14: 6190. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14146190

APA Style

Min, K.-E., Jang, J.-W., Kim, C., & Yi, S. (2024). Enhancement of Mechanical Properties of PCL/PLA/DMSO2 Composites for Bone Tissue Engineering. Applied Sciences, 14(14), 6190. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14146190

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop