← Back to 整形外科与创面修复

Programmable viscoelastic hydrogels promote antimicrobial repair and tissue remodeling

A double-crosslinked HA-gelatin-dextran matrix gives wound teams a tunable way to couple ECM-like mechanics, printability, antimicrobial action, and repair biology.

hydrogelECM mechanicswound healingantimicrobial

Full Citation

Wang J, Li X, Nicolas GM, Cai Y, Yuan T, Yan X, et al. Programmable viscoelastic hydrogels exhibit antimicrobial and regenerative properties to promote cell migration, wound healing, and tissue remodeling. Microsyst Nanoeng. 2026;12:151.

Study typeOpen-access translational biomaterials study with hydrogel engineering, in vitro cell migration, antimicrobial testing, and wound-repair modeling.
IdentifierPMID 42026025 · PMC13106852
DOI10.1038/s41378-026-01233-0

Background and Question

Chronic and complex wounds fail because the local matrix is mechanically abnormal, inflamed, microbially stressed, and poor at coordinating cell migration. Traditional dressings or single-factor scaffolds often address moisture or coverage but not the coupled mechanical and biological signals that guide epithelial, fibroblast, immune, and vascular behavior.

Research question

Can an engineered hydrogel reproduce key viscoelastic properties of native extracellular matrix while also supporting antimicrobial defense, cell migration, bioprinting, and tissue remodeling?

Methods and Evidence Chain

Material design

Built HA-gel-dex hydrogels from hyaluronic acid, gelatin, and dextran using irreversible amide bonds plus dynamic imine crosslinks.

Tuning strategy

Adjusted HA-gel to dex-CHO ratios and peptide functionalization to tune viscoelasticity, yield behavior, and bioprinting performance.

Biological assays

Assessed cell migration, regenerative behavior, antimicrobial properties, and wound/tissue-remodeling performance.

Evidence logic

Linked chemical network architecture to matrix mechanics, then linked matrix mechanics to cellular repair phenotypes.

1

Material design

Built HA-gel-dex hydrogels from hyaluronic acid, gelatin, and dextran using irreversible amide bonds plus dynamic imine crosslinks.

2

Tuning strategy

Adjusted HA-gel to dex-CHO ratios and peptide functionalization to tune viscoelasticity, yield behavior, and bioprinting performance.

3

Biological assays

Assessed cell migration, regenerative behavior, antimicrobial properties, and wound/tissue-remodeling performance.

4

Evidence logic

Linked chemical network architecture to matrix mechanics, then linked matrix mechanics to cellular repair phenotypes.

Key Results

Programmability

The hydrogel platform allowed broad viscoelastic tuning, including very high yield-ratio behavior reported by the authors.

Repair phenotype

Optimized matrices promoted cell migration and tissue-remodeling features consistent with a pro-repair microenvironment.

Infection axis

Antimicrobial properties add a clinically important layer for contaminated or high-risk wounds.

Translational fit

Bioprinting predictability suggests use as a printable wound bed, tissue model, or drug/cell delivery substrate.

Mechanism Interpretation

The central mechanism is not a single drug target. It is matrix instruction: dynamic imine bonds dissipate stress and allow remodeling, stable amide bonds preserve scaffold integrity, HA and gelatin provide ECM-like biochemical cues, and dextran-derived network tuning controls printability and cellular traction. Together these properties can reduce mechanical mismatch, permit migration, and support organized remodeling.

Mechanism / workflow schematic

Mermaid source is included so the website can render the diagram in supported browsers.

flowchart LR
  A[HA + gelatin + dextran chemistry] --> B[Stable amide network]
  A --> C[Dynamic imine crosslinks]
  B --> D[Scaffold integrity]
  C --> E[Stress relaxation and remodeling]
  D --> F[Printable wound matrix]
  E --> G[Cell migration]
  F --> H[Antimicrobial regenerative wound interface]
  G --> H

Clinical and Translational Relevance

Clinical relevance

For plastic surgery, the work is relevant to chronic wound beds, graft recipient-site preparation, tissue-engineered coverage, and postoperative wounds where mechanics and microbial burden shape outcomes. It is still preclinical, so it should be read as a platform paper rather than immediate practice-changing evidence.

Translational value

The platform is attractive because it can be tuned for different wound states: softer matrices for migration, stronger matrices for structural filling, antimicrobial variants for contaminated fields, and printable forms for patient-specific defects.

Limitations and Critique

Clinical validation

No prospective human wound-healing trial is available from this report.

Endpoint maturity

Material performance and repair surrogates are strong early signals but do not prove durable scar quality or functional recovery.

Manufacturing

Sterility, batch reproducibility, degradation products, and storage stability need regulatory-grade characterization.

Use-case clarity

The best first clinical indication remains undefined: donor site, diabetic ulcer, burn wound, traumatic defect, or surgical dehiscence.

Reviewer-style critique

This is a high-value biomaterials paper because it frames wound healing as a mechanical-biological system, not simply as growth-factor delivery. The main weakness is the translational gap: sophisticated scaffold mechanics can look convincing in model systems while failing under real wound heterogeneity, exudate, bacterial biofilm, ischemia, and patient comorbidity.

Practical Next Research Actions

Action 1

Benchmark the hydrogel against standard dressings in diabetic and ischemic wound models with blinded histology.

Action 2

Measure macrophage polarization, angiogenesis, collagen organization, and re-epithelialization as a single repair panel.

Action 3

Test loading with antibiotics, exosomes, or antifibrotic agents while preserving viscoelastic behavior.

Action 4

Design a plastic-surgery pilot around donor-site pain, epithelial closure time, infection, and scar-quality endpoints.

Evidence-quality judgment

Moderate preclinical/translational evidence: mechanistically coherent and open access, but not yet clinical efficacy evidence.