| Literature DB >> 24174936 |
C Larsson Wexell1, P Thomsen, B-O Aronsson, P Tengvall, M Rodahl, J Lausmaa, B Kasemo, L E Ericson.
Abstract
In a series of experimental studies, the bone formationEntities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24174936 PMCID: PMC3794548 DOI: 10.1155/2013/412482
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Biomater ISSN: 1687-8787
Results from AES investigation of screw shaped Ti implant surface layers.
| Preparation | Chemical composition at % (s.d.) | Thickness (nm) | Microstructure |
|---|---|---|---|
| Machined, reference | Ti: 18 (0.5); O: 59 (1.5); C: 13 (0.8); Ca: 8 (0.7); S: 0.7 (0.2); Si: 1.3 (0.3); Cl: 0.1 (0.1) |
| Plastically deformed, amorphous metal surface. Non-crystalline oxide (TiO2) |
| Glow discharge cleaned and thermally oxidized, | Ti: 23 (0.8), O: 66 (2); C: 10 (2.7); S: 0.1 (0.1); Si: 0.7 (0.7) |
| Polycrystalline metal surface. Non-crystalline oxide (TiO2) |
| Glow discharge cleaned and nitrided | Ti: 20 (0.4), N: 59 (1.1); O: 12 (0.8); C: 8 (1.1); Si: 0.6 (0.7); |
| Polycrystalline metal surface. Non-crystalline nitride (TiN) |
| H2O2 incubated 10 mM, 40 h, 8°C | Ti: 17 (3.4), O: 56 (3.2); C: 20 (2.7); Ca: 1.3 (0.3); S: 0.5 (0.2); Si: 0.2 (0.6); Cl: 0.1 (0.1); P: 0.2 (0.3); B: 0.2 (0.5); Na: 2.4 (2.3); K: 0.4 (1.1) |
| Plastically deformed, amorphous metal surface. Noncrystalline oxide (TiO2) |
Figure 1SEM images showing the surface topography of the samples (a) glow discharge cleaned and thermally oxidized sample. Bar = 5 μm; (b) glow discharge cleaned and nitrided sample. Bar = 5 μm; (c) hydrogen peroxide treated sample. Bar = 2 μm.
Figure 2SEM images of the glow-discharge nitrided sample; (a) the machining grooves are smoothened and grain structures are visible. Bar = 10 μm; (b) the surface topography of the individual grains is relatively smooth. Bar = 5 μm.
Results from AFM (surface roughness (R rms), surface area enlargement (A diff)), and optical profilometer (R ) measurements.
| Preparation |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Machined, reference, | 26.3 (17.6) | 13.1 (8.96) | 0.6 |
| Glow discharge cleaned and thermally oxidized, | 10.2 (4.45) | 0.78 (0.49) | 0.4 |
| Glow discharge cleaned and nitrided, | 25.2 (11.1) | 8.63 (6.88) | 0.6 |
| H2O2 treated, 10 mM, 40 h, 8°C | 25.6 (11.2) | 20.5 (5.39) | 0.7 |
Figure 3Morphometry. (a) Total bone contact (%) after 1, 3, and 6 weeks. Mean + s. e. (b) Total bone area (%) after 1, 3, and 6 weeks. Mean + s. e.
Figure 4((a), (b)) Solitary osteoid formation is found within the threads of the implant (arrow-heads). (a) Endosteal trabeculae in the bone marrow (BM) are protruding towards the implant surface. The border between the “old” cortex and the newly formed bone (arrows) is clearly visible. Bar = 200 μm. (a) Machined (control) sample and (b) glow discharge cleaned and thermally oxidized sample. one week after implantation. The osteoblasts are lining the newly formed trabeculae (arrow heads). Bar = 200 μm.
Figure 5H2O2 treated implant after 1 week. An intense remodeling activity (arrow-heads) is observed immediately located beneath the corticomedullary border (arrows). Bar = 200 μm.
Figure 6Three weeks after implantation. The cortical bone surface facing the implant surface is characterized by marked signs of resorption (large arrow heads) and the occurrence of new bone formation (small arrow heads). The border between the lamellar cortical bone and the newly formed bone is visible (arrows); (a) Machined (control) sample. Bar = 200 μm; (b) glow discharge cleaned and nitrided sample. Bar = 200 μm; (c) glow discharge cleaned and thermally oxidized sample. Bar = 200 μm.
Figure 7Six weeks after implantation. The implant surface towards the marrow cavity was in general in continuity with the cortical bone. Close bone-implant contact was seen for all implant types, and the threads were filled with woven bone. H2O2 treated implant. Bar = 200 μm.