This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Polyurethane foams are usually prepared by reacting isocyanates and polyols and by adding any additives such as catalysts, surfactants, chain extenders, and blowing agents. Depending on the chemical nature of these components, the final properties of the materials can be tailored to meet specific requirements. In this paper, to reduce the use of petro-based polyols, d -(+)-glucose was used as a polyol in the preparation of sugar-based polyurethane foams to be applied in a bacteria detection device. Several formulations were tested, varying the amount of surfactant (B 8496), blowing agent (distilled water), the chain extender (1,4-butanediol), and isocyanate (toluene 2,4-diisocyanate), and the influence of formulation composition on morphology, density, hydrolytic degradation, water absorption, and capillarity was studied. Overall, it was possible to conclude that when increasing the amount of water and butanediol and decreasing the isocyanate ratio, the water sorption and capillarity tend to increase. Moreover, the amount of surfactant was the least influential factor in the material’s final characteristics. The formulation that showed better results (higher water absorption and capillarity and lower hydrolytic degradation) was formulation E with 20 μL of water, 200 μL of butanediol, 0.1 g of surfactant, and 1 mL of isocyanate. Although further compatibility testing is necessary, the absorption capacity, capillarity, and moderate degradation of the glucose-based PU foams demonstrate their potential suitability for future applications in functional materials, such as bacteria detection devices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Santos et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: