Different methods of synthesizing poly(glycerol sebacate) (PGS): A review
Godinho B., Gama N., Ferreira A.
Narrative Review, published in Front Bioeng Biotechnol (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Front Bioeng Biotechnol (2022)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 36532580
- PMCID
- PMC9748623
- DOI
- 10.3389/fbioe.2022.1033827
- Citations
- 20
Abstract (original English)
Poly(glycerol sebacate) (PGS) is a biodegradable elastomer that has attracted increasing attention as a potential material for applications in biological tissue engineering. The conventional method of synthesis, first described in 2002, is based on the polycondensation of glycerol and sebacic acid, but it is a time-consuming and energy-intensive process. In recent years, new approaches for producing PGS, PGS blends, and PGS copolymers have been reported to not only reduce the time and energy required to obtain the final material but also to adjust the properties and processability of the PGS-based materials based on the desired applications. This review compiles more than 20 years of PGS synthesis reports, reported inconsistencies, and proposed alternatives to more rapidly produce PGS polymer structures or PGS derivatives with tailor-made properties. Synthesis conditions such as temperature, reaction time, reagent ratio, atmosphere, catalysts, microwave-assisted synthesis, and PGS modifications (urethane and acrylate groups, blends, and copolymers) were revisited to present and discuss the diverse alternatives to produce and adapt PGS.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.