Table 4.

Comparison of the Bioadhesive Performance of Chitosan-Based Nanofiber Membranes with Previous Literature Reports^a

sample	tissue type	adhesion test type	dry/wet condition	adhesion strength (N/cm2)	adhesion energy/area (mJ/cm2)	reference
oxidized dextran coated nanopatterns	porcine intestine	lap shear test	dry	0.7 ± 0.1	ND	Mahdavi et al.15
PNIPAm–alginate hydrogels	porcine skin, rodent skin	180° peel test	dry	ND	17.5 ± 2.5	Blacklow et al.51
PEO–CMC nanofibers	lamb esophagus	normal/tensile adhesion	dry	0.25 ± 0.05	ND	Brako et al.26
silk fibroin–tannic acid hydrogels	porcine skin	lap shear test	dry	6.94 ± 0.53	ND	Luo et al.7
gelatin methacryloyl photocure	porcine gingiva	lap shear test	dry	5.53 ± 0.67	ND	Shirzaei Sani et al.50
chitosan–pectin composite films	porcine intestine	normal/tensile adhesion	wet	0.27 ± 0.05	ND	Hagesaether et al.14
oxidized pectin coated chitosan nanofibers	porcine esophagus	normal/tensile adhesion	wet	0.55 ± 0.04	0.4 ± 0.05	current study
chitosan nanofibers	hydroxyapatite	normal/tensile adhesion	wet	0.96 ± 0.2	0.13 ± 0.01	current study

^aND: Not determined.