Literature DB >> 24811260

Bone regeneration performance of surface-treated porous titanium.

Saber Amin Yavari1, Johan van der Stok2, Yoke Chin Chai3, Ruben Wauthle4, Zeinab Tahmasebi Birgani5, Pamela Habibovic5, Michiel Mulier6, Jan Schrooten7, Harrie Weinans8, Amir Abbas Zadpoor9.   

Abstract

The large surface area of highly porous titanium structures produced by additive manufacturing can be modified using biofunctionalizing surface treatments to improve the bone regeneration performance of these otherwise bioinert biomaterials. In this longitudinal study, we applied and compared three types of biofunctionalizing surface treatments, namely acid-alkali (AcAl), alkali-acid-heat treatment (AlAcH), and anodizing-heat treatment (AnH). The effects of treatments on apatite forming ability, cell attachment, cell proliferation, osteogenic gene expression, bone regeneration, biomechanical stability, and bone-biomaterial contact were evaluated using apatite forming ability test, cell culture assays, and animal experiments. It was found that AcAl and AnH work through completely different routes. While AcAl improved the apatite forming ability of as-manufactured (AsM) specimens, it did not have any positive effect on cell attachment, cell proliferation, and osteogenic gene expression. In contrast, AnH did not improve the apatite forming ability of AsM specimens but showed significantly better cell attachment, cell proliferation, and expression of osteogenic markers. The performance of AlAcH in terms of apatite forming ability and cell response was in between both extremes of AnH and AsM. AcAl resulted in significantly larger volumes of newly formed bone within the pores of the scaffold as compared to AnH. Interestingly, larger volumes of regenerated bone did not translate into improved biomechanical stability as AnH exhibited significantly better biomechanical stability as compared to AcAl suggesting that the beneficial effects of cell-nanotopography modulations somehow surpassed the benefits of improved apatite forming ability. In conclusion, the applied surface treatments have considerable effects on apatite forming ability, cell attachment, cell proliferation, and bone ingrowth of the studied biomaterials. The relationship between these properties and the bone-implant biomechanics is, however, not trivial.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bone grafting; Bone regeneration; Nanotopography; Selective laser melting; Surface chemistry; Surface–cell interaction

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24811260     DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.04.054

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biomaterials        ISSN: 0142-9612            Impact factor:   12.479


  41 in total

Review 1.  Biological strategies for improved osseointegration and osteoinduction of porous metal orthopedic implants.

Authors:  Eric Alexander Lewallen; Scott M Riester; Carolina A Bonin; Hilal Maradit Kremers; Amel Dudakovic; Sanjeev Kakar; Robert C Cohen; Jennifer J Westendorf; David G Lewallen; Andre J van Wijnen
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part B Rev       Date:  2014-12-18       Impact factor: 6.389

2.  'Bio-nano interactions: new tools, insights and impacts': summary of the Royal Society discussion meeting.

Authors:  Iseult Lynch; Ilise L Feitshans; Michaela Kendall
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  A novel hybrid 3D-printed titanium scaffold for osteogenesis in a rabbit calvarial defect model.

Authors:  Bo Yin; Bingjian Xue; Zhihong Wu; Jiguang Ma; Keming Wang
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 4.060

Review 4.  Scaffolds and coatings for bone regeneration.

Authors:  Helena Filipa Pereira; Ibrahim Fatih Cengiz; Filipe Samuel Silva; Rui Luís Reis; Joaquim Miguel Oliveira
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2020-03-02       Impact factor: 3.896

5.  The effect of surface topography and porosity on the tensile fatigue of 3D printed Ti-6Al-4V fabricated by selective laser melting.

Authors:  Cambre N Kelly; Nathan T Evans; Cameron W Irvin; Savita C Chapman; Ken Gall; David L Safranski
Journal:  Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl       Date:  2019-01-09       Impact factor: 7.328

6.  Direct comparison of additively manufactured porous titanium and tantalum implants towards in vivo osseointegration.

Authors:  Amit Bandyopadhyay; Indranath Mitra; Anish Shivaram; Nairanjana Dasgupta; Susmita Bose
Journal:  Addit Manuf       Date:  2019-05-01

7.  In Vivo Response of Laser Processed Porous Titanium Implants for Load-Bearing Implants.

Authors:  Amit Bandyopadhyay; Anish Shivaram; Solaiman Tarafder; Himanshu Sahasrabudhe; Dishary Banerjee; Susmita Bose
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2016-06-15       Impact factor: 3.934

8.  Additively manufactured 3D porous Ti-6Al-4V constructs mimic trabecular bone structure and regulate osteoblast proliferation, differentiation and local factor production in a porosity and surface roughness dependent manner.

Authors:  Alice Cheng; Aiza Humayun; David J Cohen; Barbara D Boyan; Zvi Schwartz
Journal:  Biofabrication       Date:  2014-10-07       Impact factor: 9.954

9.  Temperature-Controlled Reversible Exposure and Hiding of Antimicrobial Peptides on an Implant for Killing Bacteria at Room Temperature and Improving Biocompatibility in Vivo.

Authors:  Jiezhao Zhan; Lin Wang; Yuchen Zhu; Huichang Gao; Yunhua Chen; Junjian Chen; Yongguang Jia; Jingcai He; Zhou Fang; Ye Zhu; Chuanbin Mao; Li Ren; Yingjun Wang
Journal:  ACS Appl Mater Interfaces       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 9.229

10.  Polydopamine coating promotes early osteogenesis in 3D printing porous Ti6Al4V scaffolds.

Authors:  Lan Li; Yixuan Li; Longfei Yang; Fei Yu; Kaijia Zhang; Jing Jin; Jianping Shi; Liya Zhu; Huixin Liang; Xingsong Wang; Qing Jiang
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.