A novel electrospun membrane based on moxifloxacin hydrochloride/poly(vinyl alcohol)/sodium alginate for antibacterial wound dressings in practical application

Figures & data

Table 1. The pH and conductivity for different volume ratios of electrospinning solutions.

12%PVA:2%SA(V:V)	pH	Conductivity (mS/cm)
8:2	6.38	21.0
7:3	6.45	26.2
6:4	6.56	30.4
5:5	6.84	37.0
4:6	7.15	42.6

Figure 1. IR spectra of different samples: (a) MH; (b) PVA/SA fibers; (c) mixture of MH/PVA/SA; and (d) MH/PVA/SA fibers.

Figure 2. Differential scanning calorimetric thermographs for samples: (a) MH/PVA/SA NFM; (b) MH; (c) mixture of MH/PVA/SA; (d) mixture of PVA/SA; (e) SA; and (f) PVA.

Figure 3. Thermogravimetric analytical thermograms for samples: (a) MH/PVA/SA NFM; (b) MH; (c) mixture of MH/PVA/SA; (d) mixture of PVA/SA; (e) SA; and (f) PVA.

Figure 4. Characterization of electrospun nanofibers by SEM imaging: (a) PVA/SA electrospun nanofibers; (b) 2% MH/PVA/SA electrospun nanofibers.

Table 2. Water-vapor permeability test results (x ± s).

Groups	n	Permeability
Blank control groups	9	(7.75 ± 1.80) × 10^−6
Control groups	9	(6.23 ± 1.03) × 10^−6
Treatment groups	9	(11.85 ± 3.01) × 10^−6*

*p < 0.05

Figure 5. In vitro drug release profile of the MH from the MH/PVA/SA nanofibers (n = 3).

Table 3. Release models and corresponding R values for the MH/SA/PVA fibers in the first 8 h.

Model	Equation	r
Zero-order	F = 0.082t + 0.104	0.973
First-order	Ln (1–F) = −0.15t − 0.046	0.995
Higuchi	F = 0.302t^1/2− 0.127	0.996

Figure 6. Antibacterial activity results of the MH/SA/PVA nanofibers against S. aureus (a and b) and P. aeruginosa (c and d). a and c: 1 h-cross-linked; b and d: 0 h-cross-linked; (1) PVA/SA nanofibers; (2) 0.5% MH/PVA/SA nanofibers; (3) 2% MH/PVA/SA nanofibers and (4) 4% MH/PVA/SA nanofibers.

Table 4. Bacterial inhibition zones for the PVA/SA and the MH/SA/PVA fibers against S. aureus and P. aeruginosa.

Classification	Group name	Inhibition zone diameter for S. aureus (mm)	Inhibition zone diameter for P. aeruginosa (mm)
0 h-cross-linked	PVA/SA	/	/
	0.5%MH/SA/PVA	17	23
	2%MH/SA/PVA	18	33
	4%MH/SA/PVA	22	38
	1 h-cross-linked	PVA/SA	/	/
0.5%MH/SA/PVA		17	25
2%MH/SA/PVA		19	34
4%MH/SA/PVA		23	38

Figure 7. (a) Picture of rat wound dressing pharmacodynamics experiment at 1, 3, 8, 11 and 14 d after application of injury; (b) Wound healing percentages for different groups.

Figure 8. Pictures of HE-stained wound skin lesions that were administered drugs at 8 and 14 d (200× magnification): (a) PVA/SA, 14 d; (b) 2% MH/PVA/SA, 14 d; (c) Yunnan baiyao woundplast, 14 d; (d) received no treatment, 14 d; (e) PVA/SA, 8 d; (f) 2% MH/PVA/SA, 8 d; (g) Yunnan baiyao woundplast, 8 d; (h) received no treatment, 8 d; and (i) normal intact skin. Arrows indicate hair follicles or sebaceous gland, arrow head: wound curst.

Table 5. Primary skin irritation test results (x± s).

		P (score)
Group	n	Erythema	Edema
Treatment group	4	0.156 ± 0.032	0.213 ± 0.060
Blank treatment group	4	0.163 ± 0.053	0.207 ± 0.081
Control group	4	0.166 ± 0.472	0.220 ± 0.066

Figure 9. Cytotoxicity tests from the MTT assays of cell viability. The absorbance was normalized to that of the negative control at each time interval, which was considered 100%. *p < 0.05 compared with negative control. The data are presented as the mean ± SD (n = 5).