The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
In vitro degradation behavior of electrospun polyglycolide, polylactide, and poly(lactide‐co‐glycolide)
Abstract
The electrospinning of polyglycolide (PGA), poly(L‐lactide) (PLA), and poly(lactide‐co‐glycolide) (PLGA; L‐lactide/glycolide = 50/50) was performed with chloroform or 1,1,1,3,3,3‐hexafluoro‐2‐propanol (HFIP) as a spinning solvent to fabricate their nanofiber matrices. The morphology of the electrospun PGA, PLA, and PLGA nanofibers was investigated with scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The PLGA nanofibers, electrospun with a nonpolar chloroform solvent, had a relatively large average diameter (760 nm), and it had a relatively broad distribution in the range of 200–1800 nm. On the other hand, the PGA and PLA fibers, electrospun with a polar HFIP solvent, had a small average diameter (∼300 nm) with a narrow distribution. This difference in the fiber diameters may be associated with the polarity of the solvent. Also, the in vitro degradation of PGA, PLA, and PLGA nanofiber matrices was examined in phosphate buffer solutions (pH 7.4) at 37°C. The degradation rates of the nanofiber matrices were fast, in the order of PGA > PLGA ≫ PLA. Structural and morphological changes during in vitro degradation were investigated with differential scanning calorimetry and wide‐angle X‐ray diffraction. For the PGA matrix, a significant increase in the crystallinity during the early stage was detected, as well as a gradual decrease during the later period, and this indicated that preferential hydrolytic degradation in the amorphous regions occurred with cleavage‐induced crystallization, followed by further degradation in the crystalline region. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 95: 193–200, 2005
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Biodegradation and biocompatibility of PLA and PLGA microspheres
Anderson, J. M., & Shive, M. S. (1997) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0169-409x(97)00048-3 · Cited by 2,617
Electrospun nanofibrous structure: A novel scaffold for tissue engineering
Li, W., Laurencin, C. T., Caterson, E. J., Tuan, R. S., & Ko, F. K. (2002) · Journal of Biomedical Materials Research · doi:10.1002/jbm.10167 · Cited by 2,427
Mechanisms of polymer degradation and erosion
Göpferich, A. (1996) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/0142-9612(96)85755-3 · Cited by 1,781
Electrospun Nanofibrous Membranes for Highly Sensitive Optical Sensors
Wang, X., Drew, C., Lee, S.-H., Senecal, K. J., Kumar, J., & Samuelson, L. A. (2002) · Nano Letters · doi:10.1021/nl020216u · Cited by 771
Self-citationLi, S. (1999) · Journal of Biomedical Materials Research · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4636(1999)48:3<342::aid-jbm20>3.0.co;2-7 · Cited by 664
Kim, K., Yu, M., Zong, X., Chiu, J., Fang, D., Seo, Y.-S., Hsiao, B. S., Chu, B., & Hadjiargyrou, M. (2003) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/s0142-9612(03)00407-1 · Cited by 562
Reed, A. M., & Gilding, D. K. (1981) · Polymer · doi:10.1016/0032-3861(81)90168-3 · Cited by 502
Biodegradation of PLA/GA polymers: increasing complexity
Vert, M., Mauduit, J., & Li, S. (1994) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/0142-9612(94)90271-2 · Cited by 425
Electrospinning of poly(ethylene-co-vinyl alcohol) fibers
Kenawy, E.-R., Layman, J. M., Watkins, J. R., Bowlin, G. L., Matthews, J. A., Simpson, D. G., & Wnek, G. E. (2003) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/s0142-9612(02)00422-2 · Cited by 359
Further investigations on the hydrolytic degradation of poly (DL-lactide)
Li, S., & McCarthy, S. (1999) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/s0142-9612(97)00226-3 · Cited by 301
Cited by
An Overview of Poly(lactic-co-glycolic) Acid (PLGA)-Based Biomaterials for Bone Tissue Engineering
Gentile, P., Chiono, V., Carmagnola, I., & Hatton, P. (2014) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms15033640 · Cited by 1,593
Poly(lactic acid) fiber: An overview
Gupta, B., Revagade, N., & Hilborn, J. (2007) · Progress in Polymer Science · doi:10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2007.01.005 · Cited by 1,360
A Comparative Review of Natural and Synthetic Biopolymer Composite Scaffolds
Reddy, M. S. B., Ponnamma, D., Choudhary, R., & Sadasivuni, K. K. (2021) · Polymers · doi:10.3390/polym13071105 · Cited by 1,104
DiameterJ: A validated open source nanofiber diameter measurement tool
Hotaling, N. A., Bharti, K., Kriel, H., & Simon, C. G. (2015) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.05.015 · Cited by 531
Design Challenges in Polymeric Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering
Echeverria Molina, M. I., Malollari, K. G., & Komvopoulos, K. (2021) · Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2021.617141 · Cited by 397
Metadata
- Authors
- You, Y., Min, B., Lee, S. J., Lee, T. S., & Park, W. H.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Polymer Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-11-22
- Volume
- 95
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 193-200
- ISSN
- 0021-8995 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-4628
- OpenAlex
- W1979798149
- Cited by
- 278
- References
- 25
- FWCI
- 4.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: In vitro degradation behavior of electrospun polyglycolide, polylactide, and poly(lactide‐co‐glycolide). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/app.21116
- The paper
- You, Y., Min, B., Lee, S. J., Lee, T. S., & Park, W. H. (2005). In vitro degradation behavior of electrospun polyglycolide, polylactide, and poly(lactide‐co‐glycolide). Journal of Applied Polymer Science. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.21116
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.