Dynamic mechanical analysis and water vapour sorption of highly porous poly(methyl methacrylate)

Methyl Methacrylate HIPE Solely Stabilized by Fluorinated Di‐block Copolymer for Fabrication of Highly Porous and Interconnected Polymer Monoliths

“…Secondly, the water molecules diffuse the polymeric network with slow speed due to the relaxation of polymer chains . PolyMMA are preferred for water uptake as compared to polyHIPEs prepared from fully hydrophobic monomers such as styrene or from fully hydrophilic monomer such as HEMA, due to their higher mechanical strengths . This offers significant practical application of poly(MMA‐DVB) in biomedical as well as agricultural fields.…”

“…[53] PolyMMA are preferred for water uptake as compared to polyHIPEs prepared from fully hydrophobic monomers such as styrene or from fully hydrophilic monomer such as HEMA, due to their higher mechanical strengths. [34] This offers significant practical applicationo fp oly(MMA-DVB) in biomedical as well as agricultural fields. Minor residual oil phase contents in polyHIPEm ay be contributedt op rovide initial water sorptioni nt he polymer.A ss hown in Figure 11 a, by increasing FDBC (wt %) from 3t o9wt %, the water uptake (WU, %) of polyHIPE increased from 186 to 372 %( for 15 min immersion) and from 226 to 414 %( for 1440 min immersion), respectively.T his increase in WU is associated with the increasedo penness (as it could provide more open channels for the water to enter and absorb in polyHIPE), relativelyh igh specific surface areas and small average pore diameteru pon in-creasingF DBC concentration.…”

“…On the other hand, MMA polyHIPEs have excellent advantages in adsorption/ separation applications as well as scaffolds for tissue engineering, owing to poly(MMA)′s superb biocompatibility and facile surface modification along with high porosity and interconnectivity of polyHIPEs. PolyMMA materials has been approved by US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) being also preferable for biomedical applications because of their better mechanical performances as compared to fully hydrophilic counterparts such as polyHEMA . So far, only few literature reports on synthesis of MMA polyHIPEs have published because of their significant solubility in water and hence difficult to emulsify.…”

“…Poly-MMA materials has been approved by US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) being also preferable for biomedical applications because of their better mechanical performances as compared to fully hydrophilic counterpartss uch as poly-HEMA. [34] So far,o nly few literature reports on synthesis of MMA polyHIPEs have published because of their significant solubility in water and hence difficult to emulsify.Z hang et al [35] used highly monodispersed poly(St-co-MMA-co-AA) particlest o stabilizeP ickering-HIPEs based on MMA in order to geto pen porousn on-crosslinked foams;h owever as mall amount of interconnected pores compared with those of HIPEs emulsified by common conventional surfactants was obtained. Busby et al [30] reported open-cell polyHIPEsc ontaining 80 wt %M MA and 20 wt %p oly(e-carpolactone) macromonomer stabilized by blend of SPAN85/PEO-PPO-PEO.…”

Acrylic-Based Materials for Biomedical and Bioengineering Applications

“…The interconnection and geometry of pores depend primarily on the tissue to be regenerated which then provide information on the desired physicochemical properties and mechanical resistance of the material. Several methods and techniques have been reported to produce scaffolds: gas foaming [118], fibre meshes sintering [119], solvent casting [120], polymerisation in solution [101,121,122], porogen leaching method [123,124], freeze-drying methods [125,126], electrospinning [127], 3D printing [128], 3D bioplotting of scaffold and cells [129], etc. For instance, acrylic scaffolds with interconnected spherical pores and controlled hydrophilicity were synthesised using a template of sintered PMMA microspheres of controlled size.…”