| ²é¿´: 522 | »Ø¸´: 2 | ||
| ±¾Ìû²úÉú 1 ¸ö ·ÒëEPI £¬µã»÷ÕâÀï½øÐв鿴 | ||
תÉíØ¼Íü²»µôͳæ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
|
[ÇóÖú]
Ó¢ÓïÂÛÎÄ·Ò룬ÇóÖú£¡¼±Óã¡help!!
|
|
|
3.5. Pore size distribution of PLGA/PHBV scaffold Pore size distribution of the scaffolds acquired by MIP test was shown in Fig. 5. The results seemed a little out of expectation. After adding the PHBV microspheres, the pore size of the scaffold should be influenced in some extent, but the PLGA/30% PHBV scaffold showed bigger pore size than that of pure PLGA. However, the PLGA/50% PHBV exhibited reasonable pore size distribution compared with PLGA/30% PHBV scaffold. Besides, most of pore sizes of the scaffolds were located between 50 ¦Ìm and 300 ¦Ìm, which were suitable for cell and tissue penetration. 3.6. Compressive strength of PLGA/PHBV scaffold The compressive strength of the scaffolds was tested on a universal material testing machine and the results were shown in Fig. 6. The value of PLGA/50% PHBV scaffolds was the highest which came to (1.48232 ¡À 0.16643) Mpa. It was obviously higher than that of pure PLGA and PLGA/30% PHBV scaffolds. However, the strength of PLGA/30% PHBV scaffold only possessed 1.12844 ¡À 0.13511 Mpa, which was of no significant differentiation to that of pure PLGA scaffold (1.00937¡À 0.12762 Mpa). |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
288»·¾³×¨Ë¶,Çóµ÷²ÄÁÏ·½Ïò
ÒѾÓÐ12È˻ظ´
ÇóÉúÎïѧѧ˶µ÷¼Á¡ª¡ª364·Ö
ÒѾÓÐ7È˻ظ´
288Çóµ÷¼Á£¬Ò»Ö¾Ô¸»ªÄÏÀí¹¤´óѧ071005
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
11408,335·Ö£¬±¾¿Æ211£¬Çóµ÷¼Á£¬¿Éתרҵ
ÒѾÓÐ5È˻ظ´
0817»¯Ñ§¹¤³ÌÓë¼¼ÊõÇóµ÷¼Á£¬Ò»Ö¾Ô¸Öк£Ñó319
ÒѾÓÐ7È˻ظ´
Äܶ¯µ÷¼Á326ר˶
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
295Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ5È˻ظ´
285Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ7È˻ظ´
315Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
²ÄÁϵ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
UTKProgress
ľ³æ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
- ·ÒëEPI: 11
- Ó¦Öú: 7 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 3605.5
- É¢½ð: 7
- ºì»¨: 3
- Ìû×Ó: 280
- ÔÚÏß: 236.4Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 3500502
- ×¢²á: 2014-10-27
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ¸ß·Ö×Ӻϳɻ¯Ñ§
¡¾´ð°¸¡¿Ó¦Öú»ØÌû
¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï
RXMCDM: ½ð±Ò+2, ¶àлӦÖú£¡ 2014-11-24 01:41:01
תÉíØ¼Íü²»µô: ½ð±Ò+16, ·ÒëEPI+1, ¡ï¡ï¡ï¡ï¡ï×î¼Ñ´ð°¸, ºÜºÃŶ! 2014-11-24 12:17:31
RXMCDM: ½ð±Ò+2, ¶àлӦÖú£¡ 2014-11-24 01:41:01
תÉíØ¼Íü²»µô: ½ð±Ò+16, ·ÒëEPI+1, ¡ï¡ï¡ï¡ï¡ï×î¼Ñ´ð°¸, ºÜºÃŶ! 2014-11-24 12:17:31
|
Hi, my friends. Enjoy. 3.5. Pore size distribution of PLGA/PHBV scaffold Pore size distribution of the scaffolds acquired by MIP test was shown in Fig. 5. The results seemed a little out of expectation. After adding the PHBV microspheres, the pore size of the scaffold should be influenced in some extent, but the PLGA/30% PHBV scaffold showed bigger pore size than that of pure PLGA. However, the PLGA/50% PHBV exhibited reasonable pore size distribution compared with PLGA/30% PHBV scaffold. Besides, most of pore sizes of the scaffolds were located between 50 ¦Ìm and 300 ¦Ìm, which were suitable for cell and tissue penetration. ͼ5 ÏÔʾÁËÓÉMIP²âÊÔ»ñÈ¡µÄÖ§¼ÜµÄ¿×¾¶·Ö²¼¡£ ½á¹ûËÆºõÓеã³öºõÒâÁÏ¡£¼ÓÈëPHBV΢Çòºó£¬Ö§¼ÜµÄ¿×¾¶Ó¦ÔÚÒ»¶¨³Ì¶ÈÉÏÊܵ½Ó°Ï죬µ«Ö§¼ÜPLGA/ 30£¥PHBVµÄ¿×¾¶±È´¿PLGAµÄ¸ü´ó¡£È»¶øÓëÖ§¼ÜPLGA/ 30£¥PHBVÏà±È£¬PLGA/ 50£¥PHBVÕ¹³öºÏÀíµÄ¿×¾¶·Ö²¼¡£´ËÍ⣬´ó¶àÊýÖ§¼ÜµÄ¿×¾¶·Ö²¼ÔÚ50ÖÁ300΢Ã×Ö®¼ä£¬ÊʺÏÓÚϸ°ûºÍ×éÖ¯Ö®¼äµÄ´©Í¸¡£ 3.6. Compressive strength of PLGA/PHBV scaffold The compressive strength of the scaffolds was tested on a universal material testing machine and the results were shown in Fig. 6. The value of PLGA/50% PHBV scaffolds was the highest which came to (1.48232 ¡À 0.16643) Mpa. It was obviously higher than that of pure PLGA and PLGA/30% PHBV scaffolds. However, the strength of PLGA/ scaffold only possessed 1.12844 ¡À 0.13511 Mpa, which was of no significant differentiation to that of pure PLGA scaffold (1.00937¡À 0.12762 Mpa). ÔÚÍòÄܲÄÁÏʵÑé»úÉϲâÊÔÁËÖ§¼ÜµÄÄÍѹǿ¶È£¬Æä½á¹ûʾÓÚͼ6ÖÐ. Ö§¼ÜPLGA/50£¥PHBVµÄÇ¿¶È×î¸ß£¬Îª1.48232¡À0.16643Õ×ÅÁ¡£Ã÷ÏÔ¸ßÓÚ´¿PLGAºÍPLGA/30£¥PHBVÖ§¼ÜµÄÄÍѹǿ¶È¡£È»¶ø£¬PLGA/30% PHBVµÄÄÍѹǿ¶ÈΪ1.12844¡À0.13511Õ×ÅÁ£¬ÕâÓë´¿PLGAÖ§¼ÜµÄÄÍѹǿ¶È1.00937¡À0.12762Õ×ÅÁûÓÐÏÔÖøÇø±ð¡£ |

2Â¥2014-11-24 01:04:25
jw-СÀ¶
гæ (³õÈëÎÄ̳)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 0.5
- Ìû×Ó: 9
- ÔÚÏß: 1.9Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 3520518
- ×¢²á: 2014-11-05
3Â¥2014-11-24 09:00:28














»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥