Nanocomposites were prepared with segmented polyurethanes and Cloisite 30B by either solution mixing or in situ polymerization and characterized by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, differential scanning calorimetry, thermogravimetric analysis and X-ray diffraction. Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity were assessed with lymphocytes while cell viability was measured by the methyl tetrazolium assay using fibroblasts. It was found that in situ polymerization rendered exfoliated nanocomposites with higher glass transition temperature, tensile modulus and thermal stability compared to nanocomposites obtained by solution mixing. The mitotic index of lymphocytes was significantly reduced at high clay concentrations (6 wt% and 10 wt%), while fibroblast viability improved in the presence of extract obtained after days 2 and 7.
ZdrahalaRJZdrahalaIJ. Biomedical applications of polyurethanes: a review of past promises, present realities, and a vibrant future. J Biomater Appl1999; 14(1): 67–90.
2.
FieldsCCassanoAAllenC. Endothelial cell seeding of a 4-mm I.D. polyurethane vascular graft. J Biomater Appl2002; 17(1): 45–70.
3.
GrenierSSandigMHoldsworthDW. Interactions of coronary artery smooth muscle cells with 3D porous polyurethane scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res Part A2009; 89A(2): 293–303.
4.
Stéphane LévesqueDRVermettePGunatillakePCommercial production of polyurethanes. In: Patrick VermetteHJGLarocheGGuidoinR (eds). Biomedical applications of polyurethanes (tissue engineering intelligence unit), Austin, TX: Landes Biosciences, 2001, pp. 272–272.
TangYWLabowRSRevenkoI. Influence of surface morphology and chemistry on the enzyme catalyzed biodegradation of polycarbonate-urethanes. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed2002; 13: 463–483.
7.
HsuSHKaoYC. Biocompatibility of poly(carbonate urethane)s with various degrees of nanophase separation. Macromol Biosci2005; 5(3): 246–253.
8.
TakaharaACouryAJHergenrotherRW. Effect of soft segment chemistry on the biostability of segmented polyurethanes. I. In vitro oxidation. J Biomed Mater Res1991; 25(3): 341–356.
9.
ThomasVJayabalanM. Studies on the effect of virtual crosslinking on the hydrolytic stability of novel aliphatic polyurethane ureas for blood contact applications. J Biomed Mater Res2001; 56(1): 144–157.
10.
KannanRYSalacinskiHJOdlyhaM. The degradative resistance of polyhedral oligomeric silsesquioxane nanocore integrated polyurethanes: an in vitro study. Biomaterials2006; 27(9): 1971–1979.
11.
SolarskiSBenaliSRocheryM. Synthesis of a polyurethane/clay nanocomposite used as coating: interactions between the counterions of clay and the isocyanate and incidence on the nanocomposite structure. J Appl Polym Sci2005; 95(2): 238–244.
12.
FinniganBMartinDHalleyP. Morphology and properties of thermoplastic polyurethane nanocomposites incorporating hydrophilic layered silicates. Polymer2004; 45(7): 2249–2260.
13.
HillJOrrJDunneN. The influence of coating technology on the mechanical performance of montmorillonite nanoclay reinforced acrylic bone cement. Int J Nano Biomater2008; 1(3): 237–249.
14.
LeeY-HKuoT-FChenB-Y. Toxicity assessment of montmorillonite as a drug carrier for pharmaceutical applications: yeast and rats model. Biomed Eng Appl Basis Commun (BME)2005; 17(2): 72–78.
15.
MarrasSIKladiKPTsivintzelisI. Biodegradable polymer nanocomposites: the role of nanoclays on the thermomechanical characteristics and the electrospun fibrous structure. Acta Biomater2008; 4(3): 756–765.
16.
AmbreAHKattiKSKattiDR. Nanoclay based composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering applications. J Nanotechnol Eng Med2010; 1(3): 031013–031019.
17.
WangZPinnavaiaTJ. Nanolayer reinforcement of elastomeric polyurethane. Chem Mater1998; 10(12): 3769–3771.
18.
ChenTKTienYIWeiKH. Synthesis and characterization of novel segmented polyurethane/clay nanocomposites. Polymer2000; 41(4): 1345–1353.
19.
TienYIWeiKH. Hydrogen bonding and mechanical properties in segmented montmorillonite/polyurethane nanocomposites of different hard segment ratios. Polymer2001; 42(7): 3213–3221.
20.
XuRManiasESnyderAJ. New biomedical poly(urethane urea)−layered silicate nanocomposites. Macromolecules2000; 34(2): 337–339.
21.
ChangJHAnYU. Nanocomposites of polyurethane with various organoclays: thermomechanical properties, morphology, and gas permeability. J Polym Sci Part B: Polym Phys2002; 40(7): 670–677.
22.
NiPLiJSuoJ. Novel polyether polyurethane/clay nanocomposites synthesized with organic-modified montmorillonite as chain extenders. J Appl Polym Sci2004; 94(2): 534–541.
23.
RhoneyIBrownSHudsonNE. Influence of processing method on the exfoliation process for organically modified clay systems. I. Polyurethanes. J Appl Polym Sci2004; 91(2): 1335–1343.
24.
StyanKEMartinDJPoole-WarrenLA. In vitro fibroblast response to polyurethane organosilicate nanocomposites. J Biomed Mater Res Part A2008; 86A(3): 571–582.
25.
Cervantes-UcJMEspinosaJIMCauich-RodríguezJV. TGA/FTIR studies of segmented aliphatic polyurethanes and their nanocomposites prepared with commercial montmorillonites. Polym Degrad Stab2009; 94(10): 1666–1677.
26.
GomesLKawanoY. Thermal degradation of biomedical polyurethanes—a kinetic study using high-resolution thermogravimetry. J Appl Polym Sci2001; 79(5): 910–919.
27.
Chan-ChanLHSolis-CorreaRVargas-CoronadoRF. Degradation studies on segmented polyurethanes prepared with HMDI, PCL and different chain extenders. Acta Biomater2010; 6(6): 2035–2044.
28.
GrassieNZulfiqarM. Thermal degradation of the polyurethane from 1,4-butanediol and methylene bis(4-phenyl isocyanate). J Polym Sci Polym Chem Ed1978; 16(7): 1563–1574.
29.
YangWPMacoskoCWWellinghoffST. Thermal degradation of urethanes based on 4,4'-diphenylmethane diisocyanate and 1,4-butanediol (MDI/BDO). Polymer1986; 27(8): 1235–1240.
