Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 214

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of Film Thickness on the Antifouling Performance of Poly(hydroxy-functional methacrylates) Grafted Surfaces

Zhao, Chao, Li, Lingyan, Wang, Qiuming, Yu, Qiuming, Zheng, Jie·2011·Langmuir

Abstract

The development of nonfouling biomaterials to prevent nonspecific protein adsorption and cell/bacterial adhesion is critical for many biomedical applications, such as antithrombogenic implants and biosensors. In this work, we polymerize two types of hydroxy-functional methacrylates monomers of 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) and hydroxypropyl methacrylate (HPMA) into polymer brushes on the gold substrate via surface-initiated atom transfer radical polymerization (SI-ATRP). We systematically examine the effect of the film thickness of polyHEMA and polyHPMA brushes on their antifouling performance in a wide range of biological media including single-protein solution, both diluted and undiluted human blood serum and plasma, and bacteria culture. Surface plasmon resonance (SPR) results show a strong correlation between antifouling property and film thickness. Too thin or too thick polymer brushes lead to large protein adsorption. Surfaces with the appropriate film thickness of ∼25-45 nm for polyHPMA and ∼20-45 nm for polyHEMA can achieve almost zero protein adsorption (<0.3 ng/cm(2)) from single-protein solution and diluted human blood plasma and serum. For undiluted human blood serum and plasma, polyHEMA brushes at a film thickness of ∼20-30 nm adsorb only ∼3.0 and ∼3.5 ng/cm(2) proteins, respectively, while polyHPMA brushes at a film thickness of ∼30 nm adsorb more proteins of ∼13.5 and ∼50.0 ng/cm(2), respectively. Moreover, both polyHEMA and polyHPMA brushes with optimal film thickness exhibit very low bacteria adhesion. The excellent antifouling ability and long-term stability of polyHEMA and polyHPMA brushes make them, especially for polyHEMA, effective and stable antifouling materials for usage in blood-contacting devices.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/la200061h

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Zhao, C., Li, L., Wang, Q., Yu, Q., & Zheng, J.
Venue
Langmuir
Published
2011-03-15
Volume
27
Issue
8
Pages
4906-4913
ISSN
  • 0743-7463 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5827
OpenAlex
W1965063770
Cited by
214
References
4
FWCI
8.89
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

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.