1. Introduction
Hydrogels are three-dimensional cross-linked materials renowned for their ability to absorb water, exhibit great flexibility, biodegradability, biocompatibility, and emulate the properties of diverse tissues in the body. This makes them ideal candidates for biomedical applications [
1,
2,
3,
4]. Various polymeric materials such as chitosan, collagen, or poly(vinyl alcohol) can be used in the formulation of hydrogels [
5,
6].
Alginate (Alg) is a natural polysaccharide made up of 1,4-linked β-D-mannuronate (M blocks) and β-L-guluronate (G blocks) units, capable of crosslinking through the addition of divalent or multivalent cations [
7]. Alg is distinguished by its biocompatibility, non-toxicity, and biodegradable properties, rendering it suitable for use in tissue engineering, being capable of transmit mechanical signals to cells or serve as a drug carrier, making it an ideal material for wound healing dressing [
8].
Despite its attributes, this biomaterial often exhibits low mechanical properties, which limits its use [
9]. Since one of its roles is to provide mechanical integrity and also transmit mechanical signals to cells and tissues, this limitation is noteworthy [
10]. Furthermore, the energy dissipation capacity of hydrogels contributes to their mechanical performance, and hydrogels with inadequate energy dissipation efficiency tend to have low resistance to crack propagation. Enhancing the ability to dissipate energy has been achieved through both covalent and non-covalent interactions, resulting in hydrogels that typically possess high tenacity [
11]. While cyclical mechanical characterization tests are commonly employed for analyzing these properties, the behavior under cyclic tensile stress remains unexplored Alg hydrogels [
12]. Similarly, studying the adhesion of these materials is crucial, given their potential application in wound dressings.
The mechanics of conventional wound dressings is not suitable for wounds, since when used, they have poor curative effect and limited lifespan. Moreover, when applied to stretchable areas of the body such as ankle, elbow, knee, wrist, etc., the healing process becomes even more challenging. Proper adherence of the hydrogels is essential to ensure efficient healing in damaged biological tissues, and to prevent the dressings falling off, thereby exposing the wound [
13]. Consequently, hydrogels must exhibit appropriate mechanical strength to enhance their practicability, enabling them to adhere effectively to biological surfaces without causing damage during removal.
Recently, various techniques have been proposed to synthesize hydrogels with enhanced mechanical properties, including interpenetrating network hydrogels, double network hydrogels, or nanocomposite hydrogels [
14]. The incorporation of nanomaterials into hydrogels allows improvements in mechanical properties by increasing crosslinking in the polymeric network, as well as enhancing adhesion to surfaces, thereby improving their potential use as wound dressings [
15].
Graphene, a nanomaterial that consists of a 2D sheet with carbons with sp
2 hybridization, possesses high mechanical resistance and remarkable electrical conductivity [
16]. However, it is hydrophobic and poorly dispersible in biological media. In contrast, graphene oxide (GO), derived from graphene, is a graphene sheet functionalized with oxygenated groups, affording it greater dispersion than graphene. However, its mechanical properties, such as elastic modulus, are lower than those of graphene [
16]. The reduction of GO into reduced graphene oxide (rGO) allows for the partial restoration of graphene properties, presenting intermediate characteristics between graphene and GO, while still being dispersible in liquid media [
17]. rGO can be incorporated into hydrophilic polymeric structures like hydrogels, involving various interactions such as: π-π stacking, hydrogen bonding, or electrostatic interactions. These interactions result in materials with new physical and chemical properties, including high mechanical resistance.
Researchers have reported enhancements in the mechanical properties of agar, poly(acrylamide) or poly(vinyl alcohol) hydrogels by introducing rGO [
18,
19]. However, Alg hydrogels with rGO have been developed without evaluating the effect in mechanical properties [
4,
20,
21].
The process of reducing GO can be accomplished through various chemical or thermal methods [
22]. One approach involves the use of dopamine (DA) as a reducing agent [
23], which undergoes autopolymerization under alkaline conditions [
24]; resulting in the formation of polydopamine (PDA) coated rGO sheets [
25]. Incorporating PDA into hydrogels has facilitated the development of hydrogels exhibiting strong adhesion to tissues [
26,
27], primarily attributed to the presence of catechol groups in the PDA [
28].
While Alg hydrogels may potentially experience improvements through the incorporation of rGO, their effectiveness is not always guaranteed, often due to inefficient interactions between the polymer chains and the material. To address this challenge, the incorporation of a third compound, condensed tannins (TA), which exhibit a high possibility of interaction with diverse functional groups, can be considered as a strategic junction point between the polymer and the nanocomposite. This aspect will be a considerate in the context of this proposal.
TA are water-soluble phenolic compounds found in various plant species known for their antioxidant and microbial activity [
29,
30,
31], have the ability to form complexes with polysaccharides and proteins. Additionally, non-covalent interactions may occur between the aromatic rings of tannins and aromatic species [
32], such as π-π interactions enabling phenolic groups of TA to bind to the rGO surface [
33]. This interaction improves mechanical properties [
34]. On the other hand, Alg hydrogels with condensed TA derivatives have been developed [
35], but a comprehensive mechanical characterization of these materials has not been conducted. Furthermore, the effect of incorporating both TA and rGO into Alg hydrogels has not been thoroughly studied.
Therefore, in the current study, Alg hydrogels were reinforced by incorporating escalating amounts of rGO and TA. The impact of these nanomaterials on the mechanical and adhesive properties of the resulting hydrogels was assessed, with the aim of their potential application in dermal or wound healing scenarios. To validate these properties, the cytotoxicity and wound healing potential of the materials were also evaluated.
Author Contributions
S.C.: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Data Curation, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing, Visualization. L.G.: Data Curation, Review & Editing. M.T.: Data Curation, Review & Editing. B.U.: Methodology, Writing - Review & Editing. C.A: Conceptualization, Methodology, Data curation. K.F.: Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Writing - Review & Editing, Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition.
Figure 1.
(a) schematic representation for adhesive test and (b) prior assembly performing adhesion test.
Figure 1.
(a) schematic representation for adhesive test and (b) prior assembly performing adhesion test.
Figure 2.
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of (a) Alg/rGO4.5, (b) Alg/rGO9, (c) Alg/TA9, (d) Alg/rGO4.5/TA9.
Figure 2.
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of (a) Alg/rGO4.5, (b) Alg/rGO9, (c) Alg/TA9, (d) Alg/rGO4.5/TA9.
Figure 3.
(a) FTIR spectra of GO, rGO, DA, TA; (b) FTIR spectra of Alg, Alg/rGO9, Alg/TA9 and Alg/rGO4.5/TA9; (c) XRD spectra of GO, rGO, Alg, Alg/rGO9, Alg/TA9 and Alg/rGO4.5/TA9.
Figure 3.
(a) FTIR spectra of GO, rGO, DA, TA; (b) FTIR spectra of Alg, Alg/rGO9, Alg/TA9 and Alg/rGO4.5/TA9; (c) XRD spectra of GO, rGO, Alg, Alg/rGO9, Alg/TA9 and Alg/rGO4.5/TA9.
Figure 4.
Mechanical properties in tensile tests including (a) tensile strength, (b) elongation at break, (c) elastic modulus and (d) toughness for Alg hydrogels with different rGO and TA contents. (*) p<=0.05 (**) p<=0.01 y (***) p<=0.001.
Figure 4.
Mechanical properties in tensile tests including (a) tensile strength, (b) elongation at break, (c) elastic modulus and (d) toughness for Alg hydrogels with different rGO and TA contents. (*) p<=0.05 (**) p<=0.01 y (***) p<=0.001.
Figure 5.
(a) Hysteresis properties of Alg hydrogels with different rGO and TA contents. (b) Self-recovery properties of hydrogels Alg hydrogels with different rGO and TA contents. (*) p<=0.05 (**) p<=0.01 y (***) p<=0.001.
Figure 5.
(a) Hysteresis properties of Alg hydrogels with different rGO and TA contents. (b) Self-recovery properties of hydrogels Alg hydrogels with different rGO and TA contents. (*) p<=0.05 (**) p<=0.01 y (***) p<=0.001.
Figure 6.
Adhesive properties of hydrogels with different rGO and TA contents in pigskin including (a) the corresponding adhesion strength, (b) repeated adhesion of the hydrogels to the substrate and (c) effect of hydrogel-substrate contact time prior to separation. (*) p<=0.05 (**) p<=0.01 y (***) p<=0.001.
Figure 6.
Adhesive properties of hydrogels with different rGO and TA contents in pigskin including (a) the corresponding adhesion strength, (b) repeated adhesion of the hydrogels to the substrate and (c) effect of hydrogel-substrate contact time prior to separation. (*) p<=0.05 (**) p<=0.01 y (***) p<=0.001.
Figure 7.
(a) Cell viability of human dermal fibroblasts in the presence of rGO, Alg, Alg/rGO4.5, Alg/rGO4.5/TA4.5, Alg/rGO4.5/TA9, Alg/rGO9, Alg/rGO9/TA4.5 y Alg/rGO9/TA9. (b) Cell migration in wound closure as a function of time and (c) Rate of wound closure (%) for Alg, Alg/rGO4.5, Alg/rGO4.5/TA4.5, Alg/rGO4.5/TA9, Alg/rGO9, Alg/rGO9/TA4.5 y Alg/rGO9/TA9. The asterisk indicates significant differences at a 95% confidence level based on Tukey's test.
Figure 7.
(a) Cell viability of human dermal fibroblasts in the presence of rGO, Alg, Alg/rGO4.5, Alg/rGO4.5/TA4.5, Alg/rGO4.5/TA9, Alg/rGO9, Alg/rGO9/TA4.5 y Alg/rGO9/TA9. (b) Cell migration in wound closure as a function of time and (c) Rate of wound closure (%) for Alg, Alg/rGO4.5, Alg/rGO4.5/TA4.5, Alg/rGO4.5/TA9, Alg/rGO9, Alg/rGO9/TA4.5 y Alg/rGO9/TA9. The asterisk indicates significant differences at a 95% confidence level based on Tukey's test.
Table 1.
Composition and nomenclature of hydrogels
Table 1.
Composition and nomenclature of hydrogels
Nomenclature |
0% rGO |
4.5%rGO |
9%rGO |
0% TA |
Alg |
Alg/rGO4.5
|
Alg/rGO9
|
4.5% TA |
Alg/TA4.5
|
Alg/rGO4.5/TA4.5
|
Alg/rGO9/TA4.5
|
9% TA |
Alg/TA9
|
Alg/rGO4.5/TA9
|
Alg/rGO9/TA9
|
Table 2.
Mechanical properties of Alg hydrogels with different rGO and TA contents.
Table 2.
Mechanical properties of Alg hydrogels with different rGO and TA contents.
Hydrogels |
Tensile strength (kPa) |
Elongation (%) |
Elastic modulus (kPa) |
Toughness (kJ/m3) |
Alg |
84.9 ± 17.6 a
|
63.8 ± 4.9 a
|
169.2 ± 41.5 a
|
22.4 ± 4.5 a
|
Alg/rGO9
|
168.8 ± 12.4 b
|
53.9 ± 4.2 a
|
412 ± 45.7 b
|
42.9 ± 3.2 a,b
|
Alg/TA9
|
179.4 ± 30.5 b
|
81.8 ± 8.1 b
|
298.7 ± 49.3 b
|
72.4 ± 17.9 b
|
Alg/rGO4.5/TA9
|
170.7 ± 23.16 b
|
74.8 ± 11.4 b
|
310.5 ± 57.5 b
|
64.3 ± 15 b
|