Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5383_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана
.pdf
8.2 Biomaterials and Medical Devices: Natural and Synthetic Strategies
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
Alginates are linear polysaccharides obtained from seaweed composed of β
mannuronate (M) and αguluronate (G) residues linked by (1,4) glycosidic
bond[73]. The polysaccharide structures are organized in blocks with consecutive
M (MMMMMM) or G (GGGGGG) residues or alternating M and G residues
(GMGMGM), depending on the algae from which they are extracted. The hydrogel
properties of alginates are related to the M/G ratio and sequence, the Gblock length,
and finally the molecular weight[74]. Alginates are widely investigated for biomedical applications thanks to their biocompatibility and the ability to form hydrogels by
2+
simple addition of divalent cations like Ca
, and several of them have found appli-
cations even in clinics. Alginate dressings have been experimented in wound heal-
TM
ing, and are commercially available as Algicell
, AlgiSite M™, Comfeel Plus™,
Kaltostat™, Sorbsan™, and Tegagen™; they show an improved ability to support
rapid healing through epithelialization[75]. Alginatebased biomaterials are also
employed for dental impression applications[76] and for the treatment of gastro
esophageal reflux [77, 78]. Other interesting biopolymers derived from algae are
carrageenan and fucoidan. Both are sulfated polysaccharides, derived, respectively,
from red and brown algae[79]. Carrageenans are sulfate galactans composed of
galactose (Gal) and 3,6anhydrogalactose with alternating α(1→3) and β(1→4)
glycosidic bonds; depending on the structure and sulfation patterns, they are classified as γ, β, δ, α, μ, κ, λ, ν, ι and θcarrageenans. Carrageenans are currently
employed as food additives and nutraceuticals; however, several studies highlight
their potential use in drugdelivery systems, tissue engineering, and wound healing[80]. Fucoidans are highly sulfated polysaccharides based on repeating units of
α(1→3)fucopyranose, often alternated with α(1→4)fucopyranose units. They
can also contain acetate groups and various glycosyl side branches (i.e. glucuronic
acid, mannose, glucose, galactose, or xylose), depending on the type of brown algae.
Like carrageenan, fucoidan is currently employed in the nutraceutical and food
industry; however, several biomedical applications in the medical devices, drug
delivery, and tissue engineering fields are under investigation.[81].
Polysaccharides derived from microbial sources are extensively studied for cosmetic, pharmaceutical, nutraceutical, and biomedical applications. Dextran is one
of the most employed; it is α1,6polyαglucoside with α1,3 branches produced
by microbial fermentation employing nonpathogenic Leuconostoc mesenteroides,
Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Lactobacillus plantarum, and Lactobacillus sanfrancisco.
Dextran is used in vascular surgery and antiplatelet applications thanks to its
antithrombotic properties; furthermore, it finds application in ophthalmic and diag-
®
nostic applications. Dextran 70
(MMW 70.000 kDa) and Dextran 40® (LMW
40.000 kDa) are employed, respectively, as plasma substitutes and to increase blood
flow in ischemic limbs[82, 83]. Lowmolecularweight dextran sulfate (LMWDS) is
also under study (Phase II clinical trial) to reduce graft rejection for pancreatic islet
transplantation[84]. Dextran is also extensively investigated as coating for diagnostic and therapeutic nanoparticles; in particular, dextrancoated magnetic nanoparticles are employed as diagnostic agents for MRI and as therapeutic nanoparticles for
iron deficiency [85]. Other interesting examples of microbial polysaccharides
include pullulan, employed for oral care and cosmetic applications[86], bacterial
231

232
cellulose, employed for topical woundhealing applications[87], and gellan gum,
employed in the development of oral, ophthalmic, and spray nasal formulations for
biomedical, cosmetic, and nutraceutical applications[88, 89]. All the cited bacterial
polysaccharides are also under investigation for other biomedical applications,
including wound healing and regenerative medicine[88].
Chitosan is the most commonly used polysaccharide from animal sources; it is
obtained from crustacean shell waste. Many chitosanbased biomaterials are commercially available, and some are in clinical trials for wound healing, pharmaceutical, diagnostic, and cosmetic applications. Formulations and medical devices based
on chitosan are usually obtained by ionic assembling with anionic polymers or by
covalent linkages performed on the amino groups by carbodiimide chemistry.
Another approach is based on the partial oxidation of chitosan with periodate
generating aldehyde groups for subsequent chemoselective reactions (Table8.2).
Table8.2 Examples ofcommercial medical devices and formulations produced
fromvegetal, microbial, or animal-derived polysaccharides.
Polysaccharide Commercial names Origin Application References
Alginate Algicell™, AlgiSite
Sodium alginate Neocolloi
Potassium alginate Blueprint Cremix®,
Sodium alginate Liquid Gaviscon
Carrageenan Carragelose
Dextran MMW Dextran 70
Dextran LMW Dextran 40
Dextran sulfate LMW Ibsolvmir
Dextrancoated iron
nanoparticles
Dextrancoated iron
nanoparticles
M™, Comfeel
Plus™, Kaltostat,
Sorbsan™,
Tegagen™
®
,
Zhermack
Plus
Dentsply DeTrey
Endorem
Combidex
CosmoFer, INFeD,
Ferrisat, DexFerrum,
and DexIron
®
; Palgat
®
, 3M ESPE
®
®
®
®
,
®
®
®
®
®
Algae Wound dressing [75]
Algae Dental impression [76]
Dental impression [76]
Algae Gastroesophageal
reflux
Algae Antiviral eye
drops, nasal spray
Microbial Plasma substitute [82, 83]
Microbial Plasma substitute [82, 83]
Microbial Islet transplant [84]
Microbial Imaging liver
cancer
(endoderm) and
lymph node
metastases
(Combidex)
Microbial Iron deficiency
therapy
[77, 78]
[85]
[85]

8.2 Biomaterials and Medical Devices: Natural and Synthetic Strategies
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
Table8.2 (Continued)
Polysaccharide Commercial names Origin Application References
233
Pullulan Listerin
Bacterial cellulose Bioprocess
Gellan Gum Grindsted
Gellan Gum Gelrite
Chitosan HemCon
Chitosan and
cellulose
Chitosan–
glycerophosphate
Chitosandextran CD gel Animal
®
and Biofill
®
and
Kelcogel
others
Chitoflex
Chitoseal
BSTCarGel
©
®
®
®
Microbial Oral care [88]
®
, XCell®,
®
®
Gellan Microbial Nutraceutical [91]
many
,
, Celox
®
Microbial Wound healing [87, 90]
Microbial Drug release,
Animal Hemostatic
®
Animal
and
microbial
Animal Cartilage repair [93]
and
microbial
ophthalmic, nasal
formulations,
cosmetic
formulations
bleeding
treatment and
bandages
Bleeding wounds [93]
Surgical
applications,
wound healing
8.2.2 Carbohydrates asSignaling Molecules: Opportunities
inTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
[89, 92]
[93]
[94, 95]
Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine strategies are based on two main pillars: (i) biomaterial scaffolds mimicking the ECM and (ii) stem cells able to regenerate tissues damaged from trauma or pathologies. The biomaterial scaffold can be
implanted or just used to culture the human cells that will be implanted/administered subsequently. The role of the biomaterial scaffold in this case consists in homing the cells and driving their fate to the required regeneration. In this context,
glycans are deeply investigated not only for their structural role to generate cell
hospitable hydrogels but also for their role as signaling molecules capable of modulating the cell’s fate. Recent studies have demonstrated that differential cell fate
modulation is strictly dependent on the glycan epitopes present in the ECM[96, 97].
Considering that both stem cells and ECM are heavily glycosylated, it is easily
understandable that a “glycocode” plays a key role in cellsignaling induction and
transduction[4, 98]. Morphological and functional tissue morphogenesis, related to
healthy and pathological states and even aging, is related to N and Oglycosylation
of ECM proteins and cell–ECM communications[99]. Alteration in glycosylation of
ECM and extracellular components has been characterized in pathological conditions like cancer[100–103], fibrosis[104, 105], and inflammatory diseases[106–108].

234
Collagen, laminin, and fibronectin are the most known examples of ECM proteins
in which glycosylation varies between physiological and pathological conditions
and in tissue morphogenesis[23, 109, 110]. ECM–cell crosstalk events are mediated
by carbohydrate–carbohydrate and, more significantly, by carbohydrate–protein
(lectins) interactions[3, 111–113]. The crosstalk will result in different structural
organizations of the ECM responsible for morphogenesis. Therefore, once the correlation between cell fate and ECM morphological and biomolecular properties
(including glycosylation) is clarified, it will be possible to design artificial ECM able
to regenerate the required tissue. Even if glycoproteomic and lectin studies are in
rapid development, we still need a clear and reliable picture of the main glycosignature changes related to morphogenesis and the occurrence of pathologies.
8.3 Carbohydrates inAnimal-Derived Medical
Devices: Friends or Foes?
Among implantable medical devices, animalderived organs or tissues are frequently
the best choice for tissue substitution or surgical applications[114]. They not only
provide the nanometrically correct architecture for the required functionality but
also possess the biochemical composition ideal for cell adhesion and consequent tissue regeneration. As a matter of fact, even in synthetic medical devices, animal
derived polymers are often employed as coatings to optimize the interactions between
tissue and material surfaces or to control the medical device performances[115–117].
Bovine pericardium or bovine/porcine patches are employed for the reinforcement
of shapes and lines in soft tissue surgery applications. Collagen and gelatinderived
meshes and coatings, as well as bovine/porcinebased devices, are employed in
wound dressing and vascular surgery applications. Animalderived dural grafts
[118, 119] and nerve conducts[120, 121] are also employed in neurosurgery.
Animalderived materials, however, suffer from a big inconvenience: the presence
of xenoantigens like αGal, Neu5Gc (N-Glycolylneuraminic acid), and Forssman
antigen (GalNAcα1, 3GalNAcβ1, 3Galα1, 4Galβ1, and 4GlcCer) [122, 123] (see
Figure8.4) that elicit an immune response in humans.
Strategies like genomic editing and chemical immunosuppression are under
investigation to limit xenoantibody production and avoid undesirable early graft
rejection[122, 124, 125]. In December 2020, transgenic pigs with depletion of α
Gal–named GalSafe pigs–were approved by FDA for human food consumption
and possible biomedical uses [126]. Decellularized animal tissues were also
developed with the aim to limit xenoantigens from cellular components; however, the immunological response of these devices is often still in place, probably
due to the glycosylation of ECM components[125]. The most efficient solution is
probably a coating able to mask the xenoantigens responsible for immunoresponse. Glutaraldehyde fixation [127, 128] is an option. Treatment of animal
derived biological tissues with a low concentration of glutaraldehyde enhances
structural performance, maintains sterility, and reduces antigenicity. Although

OH
HO
Forssman antigen
r
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
235
COOH
O
O
OH
HO
O
OH
O Ce
O
OH
HO
OH
OH
OH
α-Gal
NHAc
OH
HO
O
HO
O
OH
H
N
HO
O
Neu5Gc
O
OH
OH
O
NHAc
OH
OH
O
O
OH
O
HO
O
OH
O
OH
Figure8.4 Xenoantigens responsible for immunoresponse in humans.
the advantages of this kind of coating are wellestablished, the calcification phenomena induced at the surfaces of the devices are still a remarkable limitation[129]. To reduce the risk of calcification, antimineralization treatments have
been developed, such as the use of alphaamino oleic acid (AOA) employed in
®
Mosaic
bioprosthesis (Medtronic), which also improves durability and hemodynamic properties. The AOA reacts with the free aldehyde groups of glutaraldehyde by Schiff base covalent linkages, avoiding calcium nucleation and
precipitation[130]. Glutaraldehyde fixation is able to mask around 50% of αGal
antigens[131], but at the same time, it increases oxidative and enzymatic degradation of the tissue. Recently, a new treatment available for glutaraldehydecoated
®
tissues has been patented (FACTA
), able to totally mask αGal epitopes in
animalderived medical devices, reducing oxidative degradation and thrombotic
risk [132].
8.4 Glycoengineering Application
toRegenerative Medicine
Metabolic glycoengineering (MGE) approaches were developed in the late 1980s
and are revealed today as valuable tools to study the expression of selected glycans
in pathological phenomena and to modulate glycosignature expression [133–135].

236
Figure8.5 (a) Metabolic incorporation of Ac5ManNTGc in the sialic acid pathway; (b)
thiol-modified analogs. Source: Adapted from Du etal.[136].
Current approaches to MGE for regenerative medicine applications are mostly
focused on the replacement or modulation of cell surface glycosignature. MGE
approaches have been performed in vitro using different polyacetylated ManNAc
analogs in which the Nacetyl group was replaced by a thiolated acyl moiety. The
thiolated and polyacetylated ManNAc analogs were metabolized, generating cell
surface glycans in which Neu5Ac was replaced by a thiolated analog (see Figure8.5).
Neu5(2′thiolAc), for example, was able to induce clustering of nonadhesive Jurkat
cells and morphological neuronal differentiation of human embryoid bodyderived
(hEBD) stem cells[137]. Other Neu5Acthiolated analogs showed interesting bioactivity in human stemcell modulation, including the induction of neuronal differentiation in human Neuronal Stem Cells (hNSCs) and the suppression of adipogenic
differentiation in human adipose stem cells (hASCs)[136].
Gutmann et al. proposed a MGE approach employing tetraacylated
monosaccharides containing an azido group, such as 1,3,4,6tetraOacetylN
azidoacetylgalactosamine (Ac4GlcNAz), to obtain ECMs suitable for subsequent
click chemistry protocols in order to conjugate different functional biomolecules in
NIH 3T3 fibroblasts[138]. Also, fibroblast cellderived ECM was modified with
azido groups by MGE introducing Ac4GalNAz in the culture medium [139].
Another MGE approach was developed by Nellinger etal.[140] by the incorporation of alkenefunctionalized monosaccharides in the ECM, able to chemoselectively react with dienophiles as reporter groups. The alkenefunctionalized
monosaccharides showed good cytocompatibility, ensuring the correct exposition
of unnatural sugar on the ECM.

References
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
8.5 Future Opportunities and Major Challenges
The role of carbohydrates in medical device and tissue engineering applications is
undoubtedly impressive and merits being studied and implemented. Mimicking
nature, scientists have exploited polysaccharides as scaffolds to generate artificial
tissues, often in combination with proteins, and shorter glycans as signaling molecules to induce cell fate. Where the structural role ends and the biological signal
begins is not entirely clear. It will have to be thoroughly investigated. The possibility
to synthetically generate human tissues and even organs is a big challenge, requiring multiple expertise to control structural, mechanical, and biomolecular properties, in all of which even carbohydrates play their role. Polysaccharides and
glycosylated proteins, derived from human and nonhuman sources, are already
widely used as scaffolds to generate medical devices, but there is still room for significant improvements. The clinical translation of glycoengineered materials able to
restore damaged tissues by exploiting the glycosignature as modulators of tissue
morphogenesis is still in its infancy. The advancement in manufacturing technologies, like 3D printing and 3D bioprinting, will have a significant impact on the generation of polysaccharidebased materials with advanced micrometric physical and
morphological properties. The high structural variability of glycans in ECM and cell
surfaces and the large number of physiological and pathological events that they
can specifically induce require the collection of a lot of information to have a complete picture of their role. The research, therefore, requires robotic platforms for the
synthesis and artificial intelligence approaches to elaborate on the multitude of data
and develop predictive programs. Once the picture is sufficiently clear, the gap
between glycoscience and clinical translation will be covered, revealing the complex
mosaic in which glycans are related to age, health, or pathological states. A big challenge for glycoscientists.
237
Conflict ofInterest
LR and FN are partners and members of the Advisory Scientific Board of
Biocompatibility Innovation srl (BCI).
References
1 Smith, B.A.H. and Bertozzi, C.R. (2021). Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 20: 1–27.
2 Sampaolesi, S., Nicotra, F., and Russo, L. (2019). Future Medicinal Chemistry
11: 43–60.
3 Nicolas, J., Magli, S., Rabbachin, L. etal. Biomacromolecules https://doi.
org/10.1021/acs.biomac.0c00045.

238
4 Reily, C., Stewart, T.J., Renfrow, M.B., and Novak, J. (2019). Nature Reviews
Nephrology 15: 346–366.
5 Naso, F., Gandaglia, A., Iop, L. etal. (2012). Xenotransplantation 19: 215–220.
6 Seddon, I., Venincasa, M., Farber, N., and Sridhar, J. International Ophthalmology
Clinics 60 (4): 61–75.
7 Kowalski, P.S., Bhattacharya, C., Afewerki, S., and Langer, R. (2018). ACS
Biomaterials Sciences and Engineering 4: 3809–3817.
8 AlMaawi, S., Rutkowski, J.L., Sader, R. etal. (2020). The Journal of Oral
Implantology 46: 190–207.
9 Duncan, E. (2020). Regulatory constraints for medical products using
biomaterials. In: Biomaterials Science: An Introduction to Materials in Medicine
(ed. W.R. Wagner, S.E. SakiyamaElbert, G. Zhang, and M.J.B.T.B.S. Yaszemski),
1463–1473. Academic Press.
10 Bernard, M., Jubeli, E., Pungente, M.D., and Yagoubi, N. (2018). Biomaterials
Science 6: 2025–2053.
11 Rinaudo, M. (2008). Polymer International 57: 397–430.
12 Kirschning, A., Dibbert, N., and Drager, G. (2018). Chemistry 24: 1231–1240.
13 Mohammed, A.S.A., Naveed, M., and Jost, N. Journal of Polymers and the
Environment https://doi.org/10.1007/s10924- 021- 02052- 2.
14 Tchobanian, A., Van Oosterwyck, H., and Fardim, P. (2019). Carbohydrate
Polymers 205: 601–625.
15 Breimer, M.E. and Holgersson, J. (2019). Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences 6: 57.
16 Joziasse, D.H. and Oriol, R. (1999). Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, Molecular Basis
of Disease 1455: 403–418.
17 Hinderer, S., Layland, S.L., and SchenkeLayland, K. (2016). Advanced Drug
Delivery Reviews 97: 260–269.
18 Dzamba, B.J. and DeSimone, D.W. (2018). Current Topics in Developmental Biology
130: 245–274.
19 Dang, T. T., Nikkhah, M., Memic, A., and Khademhosseini, A. (2014). Polymeric
biomaterials for implantable prostheses. In: Natural and Synthetic Biomedical
Polymers, 1e (ed. S.G. Kumbar, C.T. Laurencin, and M. Deng), 309–331. Oxford:
Elsevier.
20 Li, C., Guo, C., Fitzpatrick, V. etal. (2020). Nature Reviews Materials 5: 61–81.
21 Liu, L., Liu, Y., Li, J. etal. (2011). Microbial Cell Factories 10: 99.
22 Taylor, S.L., Hogwood, J., Guo, W. etal. (2019). Scientific Reports 9: 2679.
23 Pignatelli, C., Cadamuro, F., Magli, S. etal. (2021). Glycans and hybrid glyco
materials for artificial cell microenvironment fabrication. In: Carbohydrate
Chemistry: Chemical and Biological Approaches. vol. 44 (ed. A.P. Rauter,
T.K. Lindhorst, and Y. Queneau), 250–276. https://doi.org/10.1039/9781788013864
24 Reddy, N., Reddy, R., and Jiang, Q. (2015). Trends in Biotechnology 33: 362–369.
25 Amorim, S., Reis, C.A., Reis, R.L., and Pires, R.A. (2021). Trends in Biotechnology
39: 90–104.
26 Price, R.D., Berry, M.G., and Navsaria, H.A. (2007). Journal of Plastic,
Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery 60: 1110–1119.
27 Hussain, Z., Thu, H.E., Katas, H., and Bukhari, S.N.A. (2017). Polymer Reviews 57:
594–630.

References
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
28 Campoccia, D., Hunt, J.A., Doherty, P.J. etal. (1996). Biomaterials 17:
963–975.
29 Simman, R. (2018). Journal of the American College of Clinical Wound Specialists
8: 10–11.
30 Nehrer, S., Domayer, S., Dorotka, R. etal. (2006). European Journal of Radiology
57: 3–8.
31 Longinotti, C. (2014). Burns and Trauma 2: 162–168.
32 Benedetti, L., Cortivo, R., Berti, T. etal. (1993). Biomaterials 14: 1154–1160.
33 Iwasa, J., Engebretsen, L., Shima, Y., and Ochi, M. (2009). Knee Surgery, Sports
Traumatology, Arthroscopy 17: 561–577.
34 Deszcz, I., LisNawara, A., Grelewski, P. etal. (2020). Regenerative Biomaterials 7:
543–552.
35 Marcacci, M., Zaffagnini, S., Kon, E. etal. (2002). Knee Surgery, Sports
Traumatology, Arthroscopy 10: 154–159.
36 Pavesio, A., Abatangelo, G., Borrione, A. etal. (2003). Novartis Foundation
Symposium 249: 203–241.
37 Wylie, J.D., Hartley, M.K., Kapron, A.L. etal. (2015). Clinical Orthopaedics and
Related Research 473: 1673–1682.
38 Makris, E.A., Gomoll, A.H., Malizos, K.N. etal. (2015). Nature Reviews
Rheumatology 11: 21–34.
39 Huynh, A. and Priefer, R. (2020). Carbohydrate Research 489: 107950.
40 Rah, M.J. (2011). Optometry 82: 38–43.
41 Modi, S.S., Davison, J.A., and Walters, T. (2011). Clinical Ophthalmology 5:
1381–1389.
42 Kretz, F.T.A., Limberger, I.J., and Auffarth, G.U. (2014). Journal of Cataract and
Refractive Surgery 40: 1879–1884.
43 Barth, H., Crafoord, S., and Ghosh, F. (2021). Current Eye Research 46: 373–379.
44 Samsom, M., Korogiannaki, M., Subbaraman, L.N. etal. (2018). Journal of
Biomedial Materials Research Part B Applied Biomaterials 106: 1818–1826.
45 Maulvi, F.A., Singhania, S.S., Desai, A.R. etal. (2018). International Journal of
Pharmaceutics 548: 139–150.
46 Kablik, J., Monheit, G.D., Yu, L. etal. (2009). Dermatologic Surgery 35 (Suppl 1):
302–312.
47 Stocks, D., Sundaram, H., Michaels, J. etal. (2011). Journal of Drugs in
Dermatology 10: 974–980.
48 Bogdan Allemann, I. and Baumann, L. (2008). Clinical Interventions in Aging 3:
629–634.
49 Nicolas, J., Magli, S., Rabbachin, L. etal. (2020). Biomacromolecules 21:
1968–1994.
50 Henrotin, Y., Mathy, M., Sanchez, C., and Lambert, C. (2010). Therapeutic
Advances in Musculoskeletal Disease 2: 335–348.
51 Oliveira, J.T. and Reis, R.L. (2008). Naturalbased polymers for biomedical
applications. In: Woodhead Publishing Series in Biomaterials (ed. R.L. Reis,
N.M. Neves, J.F. Mano, etal.) H. S. B. T.N.B. P. for B. A. Azevedo, 485–514.
Woodhead Publishing.
239

240
52 Iannitti, T., MoralesMedina, J.C., Merighi, A. etal. (2018). Drug Delivery and
Translational Research 8: 994–999.
53 Henrotin, Y., Hauzeur, J.P., Bruel, P., and Appelboom, T. (2012). BMC Research
Notes 5: 407.
54 Henrotin, Y., Marty, M., and Mobasheri, A. (2014). Maturitas 78: 184–187.
55 Shriver, Z., Capila, I., Venkataraman, G., and Sasisekharan, R. (2012). Heparin
and heparan sulfate: analyzing structure and microheterogeneity. Handbook of
Experimental Pharmacology,207: 159–176.
56 Meneghetti, M.C.Z., Hughes, A.J., Rudd, T.R. etal. (2015). Journal of the Royal
Society, Interface 12: 589.
57 Fu, L., Suflita, M., and Linhardt, R.J. (2016). Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 97:
237–249.
58 Meddahi, A., Lemdjabar, H., Caruelle, J.P. etal. (1996). International Journal of
Biological Macromolecules 18: 141–145.
59 Barbosa, I., Morin, C., Garcia, S. etal. (2005). Journal of Cell Science 118: 253–264.
60 Barritault, D., GilbertSirieix, M., Rice, K.L. etal. (2017). Glycoconjugate Journal
34: 325–338.
61 Rabenstein, D.L. (2002). Natural Product Reports 19: 312–331.
62 Biran, R. and Pond, D. (2017). Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 112: 12–23.
63 Preston, T.J., Ratliff, T.M., Gomez, D. etal. (2010). The Journal of Extra‐Corporeal
Technology 42: 199–202.
64 Wendel, H.P. and Ziemer, G. (1999). The European Journal of Cardio‐Thoracic
Surgery 16: 342–350.
65 Puranik, A.S., Dawson, E.R., and Peppas, N.A. (2013). International Journal of
Pharmaceutics 441: 665–679.
66 Rykowska, I., Nowak, I., and Nowak, R. Molecules https://doi.org/10.3390/
molecules25204624.
67 Liang, Y. and Kiick, K.L. (2014). Acta Biomaterialia 10: 1588–1600.
68 Cheng, C., Sun, S., and Zhao, C. (2014). Journal of Materials Chemistry B 2:
7649–7672.
69 Bedini, E., Laezza, A., and Iadonisi, A. (2016). European The Journal of Organic
Chemistry 2016: 3018–3042.
70 Tayama, E., Hayashida, N., Akasu, K. etal. (2000). Artificial Organs 24: 618–623.
71 Larm, O., Larsson, R., and Olsson, P. (1983). Biomaterials, Medical Devices, and
Artificial Organs 11: 161–173.
72 Blezer, R., Cahalan, L., Cahalan, P.T., and Lindhout, T. (1998). Blood Coagulation
and Fibrinolysis 9 (5): 435–440.
73 Lee, K.Y. and Mooney, D.J. (2012). Progress in Polymer Science 37: 106–126.
74 George, M. and Abraham, T.E. (2006). Journal of Controlled Release 114: 1–14.
75 Ahmed, S. (ed.) (2019). Alginates: Applications in the Biomedical and Food
Industries. Wiley.
76 Nallamuthu, N.A., Braden, M., and Patel, M.P. (2012). Dental Materials 28:
756–762.
77 Dettmar, P.W., Sykes, J., Little, S.L., and Bryan, J. (2006). International Journal of
Clinical Practice 60: 275–283.
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
