Добавил:
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
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
15.09.2026
Размер:
17 Мб
Скачать
☆
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 αguluronate (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 Gblock 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]. Alginatebased 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 3,6anhydrogalactose 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 θcarrageenans. Carrageenans are currently employed as food additives and nutraceuticals; however, several studies highlight their potential use in drugdelivery 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 α1,6polyαglucoside with α1,3 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]. Lowmolecularweight dextran sulfate (LMWDS) 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, dextrancoated 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 woundhealing 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 chitosanbased 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 (Table8.2).
Table8.2 Examples ofcommercial medical devices and formulations produced fromvegetal, 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 Dextrancoated iron
nanoparticles
Dextrancoated 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 Gastroesophageal
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/
Table8.2 (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
Chitosandextran CD gel Animal
®
and Biofill
®
and Kelcogel others
Chitoflex
Chitoseal
BSTCarGel
©
® ®
®
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 asSignaling Molecules: Opportunities inTissue 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 cellsignaling induction and transduction[4, 98]. Morphological and functional tissue morphogenesis, related to healthy and pathological states and even aging, is related to N and Oglycosylation 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 inAnimal-Derived Medical
Devices: Friends or Foes?
Among implantable medical devices, animalderived 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 gelatinderived meshes and coatings, as well as bovine/porcinebased devices, are employed in wound dressing and vascular surgery applications. Animalderived dural grafts [118, 119] and nerve conducts[120, 121] are also employed in neurosurgery.
Animalderived materials, however, suffer from a big inconvenience: the presence of xenoantigens like αGal, Neu5Gc (N-Glycolylneuraminic acid), and Forssman antigen (GalNAcα1, 3GalNAcβ1, 3Galα1, 4Galβ1, and 4GlcCer) [122, 123] (see Figure8.4) 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
Figure8.4 Xenoantigens responsible for immunoresponse in humans.
the advantages of this kind of coating are wellestablished, 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 alphaamino 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 αGal antigens[131], but at the same time, it increases oxidative and enzymatic degra­dation of the tissue. Recently, a new treatment available for glutaraldehydecoated
®
tissues has been patented (FACTA
), able to totally mask αGal epitopes in animalderived medical devices, reducing oxidative degradation and thrombotic risk [132].
8.4 Glycoengineering Application toRegenerative 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
Figure8.5 (a) Metabolic incorporation of Ac5ManNTGc in the sialic acid pathway; (b)
thiol-modified analogs. Source: Adapted from Du etal.[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 Nacetyl 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 Figure8.5). Neu5(2′thiolAc), for example, was able to induce clustering of nonadhesive Jurkat cells and morphological neuronal differentiation of human embryoid bodyderived (hEBD) stem cells[137]. Other Neu5Acthiolated analogs showed interesting bioac­tivity in human stemcell 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 1,3,4,6tetraOacetylN 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 cellderived ECM was modified with azido groups by MGE introducing Ac4GalNAz in the culture medium [139]. Another MGE approach was developed by Nellinger etal.[140] by the incorpora­tion of alkenefunctionalized monosaccharides in the ECM, able to chemoselec­tively react with dienophiles as reporter groups. The alkenefunctionalized 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 polysaccharidebased 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 ofInterest
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. etal. 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. etal. (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 AlMaawi, S., Rutkowski, J.L., Sader, R. etal. (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. SakiyamaElbert, 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 SchenkeLayland, 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. etal. (2020). Nature Reviews Materials 5: 61–81. 21 Liu, L., Liu, Y., Li, J. etal. (2011). Microbial Cell Factories 10: 99. 22 Taylor, S.L., Hogwood, J., Guo, W. etal. (2019). Scientific Reports 9: 2679. 23 Pignatelli, C., Cadamuro, F., Magli, S. etal. (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. etal. (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. etal. (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. etal. (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., LisNawara, A., Grelewski, P. etal. (2020). Regenerative Biomaterials 7:
543–552.
35 Marcacci, M., Zaffagnini, S., Kon, E. etal. (2002). Knee Surgery, Sports
Traumatology, Arthroscopy 10: 154–159.
36 Pavesio, A., Abatangelo, G., Borrione, A. etal. (2003). Novartis Foundation
Symposium 249: 203–241.
37 Wylie, J.D., Hartley, M.K., Kapron, A.L. etal. (2015). Clinical Orthopaedics and
Related Research 473: 1673–1682.
38 Makris, E.A., Gomoll, A.H., Malizos, K.N. etal. (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. etal. (2018). Journal of
Biomedial Materials Research Part B Applied Biomaterials 106: 1818–1826.
45 Maulvi, F.A., Singhania, S.S., Desai, A.R. etal. (2018). International Journal of
Pharmaceutics 548: 139–150.
46 Kablik, J., Monheit, G.D., Yu, L. etal. (2009). Dermatologic Surgery 35 (Suppl 1):
302–312.
47 Stocks, D., Sundaram, H., Michaels, J. etal. (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. etal. (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). Naturalbased polymers for biomedical
applications. In: Woodhead Publishing Series in Biomaterials (ed. R.L. Reis, N.M. Neves, J.F. Mano, etal.) H. S. B. T.N.B. P. for B. A. Azevedo, 485–514. Woodhead Publishing.
239
 
240
52 Iannitti, T., MoralesMedina, J.C., Merighi, A. etal. (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. etal. (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. etal. (1996). International Journal of
Biological Macromolecules 18: 141–145.
59 Barbosa, I., Morin, C., Garcia, S. etal. (2005). Journal of Cell Science 118: 253–264. 60 Barritault, D., GilbertSirieix, M., Rice, K.L. etal. (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. etal. (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. etal. (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.