. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 Jul 1.

Published in final edited form as: Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol. 2023 Apr 12;15(4):e1889. doi: 10.1002/wnan.1889

Table 9:

Select fibrous and hydrogel-based nanomaterials deployed as adhesion barriers in surgery.

Composition	Architecture	Mode of Administration	Animal Model (Evaluation Time Point)	Adhesion Score (control vs. test) (Scale)	Refs.
Poly(lactide-co-caprolactone)	Fiber	Blowspinning	Mouse cecal ligation (t=7d)	3.5 vs. 2.5 (0 to 5)	(Erdi et al., 2022)
Poly(ethylene glycol)/poly(caprolactone)	Fiber	Electrospinning	Rabbit tendon anastomosis (t=14d)	3.5 vs. 1 (0 to 5)	(C.-H. Chen et al., 2015)
Dodecyl-modified hydroxypropyl methylcellulose with poly(ethylene glycol)-b-poly(lactic acid)	Hydrogel	Injection	Rat cardiac infarct (t=28d) / Rat abdominal wall ligation (t=28d)	4.2 vs. 0.6 (0 to 5) / 3.2 vs. 1.35 (0 to 5)	(Stapleton et al., 2019, 2021)
N,Ocarboxymethyl chitosan and aldehyde hyaluronic acid	Hydrogel	Injection	Rat abdominal wall abrasion (t=7d)	5 vs. 0.3 (0 to 5)	(Song et al., 2016)
Poly(ethylene glycol)-block-poly(L-lactide-co-glycolide) with 10-hydroxycamptothecin and diclofenac sodium drugs	Fiber	Electrospinning	Mouse cecal abrasion (t=14d)	2.9 vs. 0.3 (0 to 4)	(J. Li et al., 2018)
Celecoxib-loaded poly(L-lactic acid)-poly(ethylene glycol) and hyaluronic acid	Fiber	Electrospinning	Rabbit tendon anastomosis (t=21d)	4 vs. 1.75 (0 to 5)	(Jiang et al., 2015)