Feng Peng1,2, Donghui Wang1,2, Yaxin Tian1,2, Huiliang Cao1, Yuqin Qiao1, Xuanyong Liu3. 1. State Key Laboratory of High Performance Ceramics and Superfine Microstructure, Shanghai Institute of Ceramics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, 200050, China. 2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China. 3. State Key Laboratory of High Performance Ceramics and Superfine Microstructure, Shanghai Institute of Ceramics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, 200050, China. xyliu@mail.sic.ac.cn.
Abstract
In recent years, magnesium (Mg) alloys show a promising application in clinic as degradable biomaterials. Nevertheless, the poor corrosion resistance of Mg alloys is the main obstacle to their clinical application. Here we successfully seal the pores of plasma electrolytic oxidation (PEO) coating on AZ31 with Mg-Al layered double hydroxide (LDH) via hydrothermal treatment. PEO/LDH composite coating possess a two layer structure, an inner layer made up of PEO coating (~5 μm) and an outer layer of Mg-Al LDH (~2 μm). Electrochemical and hydrogen evolution tests suggest preferable corrosion resistance of the PEO/LDH coating. Cytotoxicity, cell adhesion, live/dead staining and proliferation data of rat bone marrow stem cells (rBMSCs) demonstrate that PEO/LDH coating remarkably enhance the cytocompatibility of the substrate, indicating a potential application in orthopedic surgeries. In addition, hemolysis rate (HR) test shows that the HR value of PEO/LDH coating is 1.10 ± 0.47%, fulfilling the request of clinical application. More importantly, the structure of Mg-Al LDH on the top of PEO coating shows excellent drug delivery ability.
In recent years, magnesium (Mg) alloys show a promising application in clinic as degradable biomaterials. Nevertheless, the poor corrosion resistance ofMgalloys is the main obstacle to their clinical application. Here we successfully seal the pores of plasma electrolytic oxidation (PEO) coating on AZ31 with Mg-Al layered double hydroxide (LDH) via hydrothermal treatment. PEO/LDH composite coating possess a two layer structure, an inner layer made up ofPEO coating (~5 μm) and an outer layer ofMg-Al LDH (~2 μm). Electrochemical and hydrogen evolution tests suggest preferable corrosion resistance of the PEO/LDH coating. Cytotoxicity, cell adhesion, live/dead staining and proliferation data ofrat bone marrow stem cells (rBMSCs) demonstrate that PEO/LDH coating remarkably enhance the cytocompatibility of the substrate, indicating a potential application in orthopedic surgeries. In addition, hemolysisrate (HR) test shows that the HR value ofPEO/LDH coating is 1.10 ± 0.47%, fulfilling the request of clinical application. More importantly, the structure ofMg-Al LDH on the top ofPEO coating shows excellent drug delivery ability.
With favorable properties of biodegradation and mechanical behaviors, Mgalloys are an attractive choice for orthopedic applications[1-3]. However, along with the fast degradation ofMg, an increasing pH value will be observed in the microenvironment and cause the inflammation of tissues[4, 5]. More seriously, the loss of mechanical strength might result in the failure of implantation. Surface modification is one of the most effective methods to enhance the corrosion resistance ofMgalloys, including hydrothermal treatment[6-8], plasma electrolytic oxidation (PEO)[9-14], electron beam treatments[15], ion implantation[16], apatite coating[11], and organic polymer coating[12, 17, 18] etc. PEO as one of the most commonly studied methods can produce a highly adherent ceramic oxide coating, endowing Mgalloys an obviously improved corrosion resistance. However, pores on the surface formed during the PEO process limited its corrosion resistance, because corrosive solution could easily penetrate into the substrate through the pores. Cui et al. reported that coating thickness has an insignificant influence on the corrosion resistance ofPEO coating, while porosity of the coating is one of the main factors that determine its corrosion resistance[19].Many studies have been focused on decreasing number and size of pores on the surface ofPEO coating to improve its corrosion resistance[20-22]. Zhao et al. added graphene oxide into the electrolyte and found that the number of pores on the PEO coating was significantly decreased[22]. Moreover, some researchers tried to fabricate self-sealing PEO coating on Mgalloys[9, 10, 13]. Dong et al. used electrolyte consisted ofNaH2P2O7, K2TiF6, NaF, C6H12N4 and NaOH, to prepare self-sealing PEO coating on AM60[10]. However, there were still few pores and cracks on such PEO coating. As long as PEO coating contains pores or cracks, its long-term corrosion resistance cannot be guaranteed. Considering these situations, researchers fabricate composite coatings to seal the pores ofPEO coating. Li et al. used hydroxyapatite to seal the pores ofPEO coating and found that osseointegration and corrosion resistance ofMgalloy are enhanced[23]. Our previous study also revealed that poly(L-lactide) can be used to sealed the pores ofPEO coating and enhanced its corrosion resistance and biocompatibility[12]. However, both hydroxyapatite and poly(L-lactide) are unable to work as a drug delivery platform.Layered double hydroxides (LDHs), with a chemicalformula [M2+
1−xM3+x(OH)2][An−]x/n·zH2O, where M2+ represent bivalent cations, M3+ represent trivalent cations, are made up of positively charged brucite-like layers and an interlayer region containing various anions and solvation molecules. The special structure of LDHs makes it a desirable platform for drug delivey[24-27]. Li et al. employed LDH nanoparticles to simultaneously deliver an anticancer drug 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and Allstars Cell Death siRNA (CD-siRNA) to overcome the drug resistance and enhance cancer treatment[28]. Furthermore, our previous study revealed that Mgalloy coated with Mg-Al LDH exhibit desirable biocompatibility[29]. On the other hand, the small particle size of LDH exactly can be applied to seal the pores ofPEO coating. From these perspectives, we explore the way to use Mg-Al LDH to seal the pores ofPEO coating to enhance its corrosion resistance. Moreover, LDH, as the outer layer, could improve the biocompatibility ofMgalloy and endow its surface a drug-delivery ability to regulate cells’ behaviors.Herein, we in-situ grew Mg-Al LDH on PEO coating to seal its pores. As shown in Fig. 1, PEO coating incorporated with fluoride was firstly produced via a PEO process, and followed by a hydrothermal treatment. As PEO coating would release Mg ions to the solution, Mg-Al LDH can be in-situ formed on the top ofPEO coating. Thus a newly designed PEO/LDH composite coating was acquired. Corrosion resistance, cytocompatibility, hemolysisrate and drug loading ability ofPEO/LDH composite coating were evaluated subsequently.
Figure 1
The process of fabricating PEO/LDH coating.
The process offabricating PEO/LDH coating.
Results and Discussions
Coating Characterization
Figure 2a–c depict the surface morphology of three coated samples. PEO coating showed porous structure and a trace of nano-sheets closely adhered to its surface (Fig. 2a). A compacted nanoflake-like structure appeared on the surface of LDH and PEO/LDH coating (Fig. 2b,c). With regard to PEO/LDH coating, the homogeneous and compacted nanoflake-like structure was formed on the top ofPEO coating after hydrothermal treatment, successfully sealing the pores ofPEO coating. Furthermore, both nanoflake-like structure of LDH and PEO/LDH coating showed superior attachment to the substrate (Figure S1 in the Supporting Information). The XRD patterns ofall samples are shown in Fig. 2d. Only feature peaks ofMg were detected in the pattern ofAZ31 alloy. In the pattern ofPEO coating, the crystalline phase ofMgO appeared and the diffraction peak around 11.7° indicated the formation ofMg-Al LDH. The result certifies that the nano-sheet observed on the surface ofPEO coating is Mg-Al LDH. As AZ31 contains Mg and Al element, Mg2+ and Al3+ ions would release from the substrate during the PEO process, then reacted with OH− and formed Mg-Al LDH. Both Mg(OH)2 and Mg-Al LDH were detected in the pattern of LDH, which is consistent with our previous study[29]. It is worth mentioning that there was no Mg(OH)2 phase observed on the surface ofPEO/LDH coating, which means the nanoflake-like structure on its surfaces was pure Mg-Al LDH. The Mg-Al LDH peaks appeared in the patterns ofPEO, LDH and PEO/LDH were around 11.7°, corresponding to (003) crystal plane, and revealing an interlayer spacing of 0.76 nm.
Figure 2
Surface morphology of PEO (a), LDH (b) and PEO/LDH (c); XRD patterns of all samples (d).
Surface morphology ofPEO (a), LDH (b) and PEO/LDH (c); XRD patterns ofall samples (d).To conduct TEM analysis, powder was scratched offfrom the surface of specimen, and the result is also displayed in Fig. 3. Figure 3a shows typical bright-field TEM images ofPEO coating powder. The corresponding high-resolution image in Fig. 3d clearly revealed a set offringes in different directions and the measured interplanar spacing was 0.21 nm, representing (200) lattice plane ofMgO. The high-resolution image (Fig. 3e) of LDH powder suggested two set offringes. The fringe with 0.31 nm interplanar spacing was ascribed to (006) lattice plane ofMg-Al LDH and the fringe of 0.23 nm to (101) lattice plane ofMg(OH)2. With regard to PEO/LDH specimen powder, as shown in Fig. 3f, fringe with 0.72 nm interplanar spacing indicated (003) lattice plane ofMg-Al LDH. The polycrystalline nature ofall the powders was demonstrated by the continuous rings in the selected area electron diffraction (SAED) pattern in the inset ofFig. 3d–f. These results are consistent with the XRD patterns.
Figure 3
TEM analysis results of morphology, HRTEM and SAED of PEO (a,d), LDH (b,e) and PEO/LDH (c,f).
TEM analysis results of morphology, HRTEM and SAED ofPEO (a,d), LDH (b,e) and PEO/LDH (c,f).Element composition and chemical states of surface elements were carried out using XPS. Table 1 shows the surface element composition ofall coatings. Al element was detected on all samples. However, the content ofAl on PEO coating (0.41%) was obviously lower than the other two samples (5.44% and 5.57%, respectively), indicating that only few Mg-Al LDH were formed on the surface ofPEO during the PEO process as shown in Fig. 2a. N element was detected on the surface of LDH and PEO/LDH coatings, suggesting that nitrate was in the interlayer ofMg-Al LDH to balance the positive charge. High-resolution spectra of O 1 s and Al 2p of LDH and PEO/LDH are show in Fig. 4a–d. Both of the O 1 s peak can be divided into two peaks centered at 530.9 and 531.9 eV corresponding to oxygen peak in hydroxyl bonding with Mg and Al. Al 2p peak of LDH and PEO/LDH centered at 74.2 eV ascribed to aluminum peak bonding with hydroxyl. The results of XPS further confirmed the existence ofMg-Al LDH on all treated samples.
Table 1
Surface elemental composition of coated samples measured by XPS.
Samples
C (at %)
N (at %)
O (at %)
Mg (at %)
Al (at %)
Al/Mg
PEO
11.89
/
59.48
28.22
0.41
0.015
LDH
22.83
0.36
56.67
14.7
5.44
0.37
PEO/LDH
30.02
0.43
49.86
15.1
4.57
0.302
Figure 4
High-resolution spectra of O 1 s of LDH (a) and PEO/LDH (c), Al 2p of LDH (b) and PEO/LDH (d).
Surface elemental composition of coated samples measured by XPS.High-resolution spectra of O 1 s of LDH (a) and PEO/LDH (c), Al 2p of LDH (b) and PEO/LDH (d).The cross-sectional morphology of treated samples and corresponding scanning maps are presented in Fig. 5a–c. The thickness ofPEO and LDH coating were approximately 6.5 μm and 3.5 μm, respectively. There were two layers ofPEO/LDH coating. The inner layer ascribed to the process ofPEO, while the outer layer ascribed to hydrothermal treatment, and the thickness were about 5 μm and 2 μm, respectively. During the process of hydrothermal treatment, part of the PEO coating gradually dissolved in the alkaline hydrothermal solution, releasing Mg2+ ions[30, 31]. The released Mg2+ reacted with OH− and AlO2
−, forming Mg-Al LDH particles in the pores and on the surface ofPEO coating. As the reaction proceeding, Mg-Al LDH finally sealed the pores of the PEO coating. Thus, a two layer structure coating was fabricated. In addition, the content offluorine on the surface ofPEO/LDH was also decreased comparing to PEO coating (Table S1). The corresponding scanning maps ofMg, Al, O, Si and F (Fig. 5c) further confirmed the double layer structure ofPEO/LDH coating.
Figure 5
Cross-sectional morphology of PEO (a), LDH (b) and PEO/LDH (c), and corresponding scanning maps of characteristic elements.
Cross-sectional morphology ofPEO (a), LDH (b) and PEO/LDH (c), and corresponding scanning maps of characteristic elements.
Corrosion Resistance
Figure 6a describes the electrochemical potentiodynamic polarization curves ofall samples and corresponding corrosion parameters are showed in Table 2. Comparing to AZ31 and PEO, LDH and PEO/LDH showed lower free current density jcorr and higher corrosion potential Ecorr. Though the corrosion potential Ecorr ofPEO/LDH was slightly lower than that of LDH, the polarization resistance Rp ofPEO/LDH was about one order higher than LDH, implying an enhanced protective effect. The result suggests that PEO/LDH composite coating possesses the best corrosion resistance.
Figure 6
Polarization curves (a), hydrogen evolution (b) and corrosion rate (c) of all samples.
Table 2
Corrosion potential (Ecorr), corrosion current density (icorr) and polarization resistance (Rp) calculated according to the polarization curves.
Samples
AZ31
PEO
LDH
PEO/HT
jcorr (A·cm−2)
1.66 × 10−5
0.945 × 10−5
3.34 × 10−5
3.92 × 10−6
Ecorr (V)
−1.45
−1.22
−1.12
−1.2
Rp (Ω·cm−2)
7.21 × 104
1.13 × 105
3.05 × 104
2.79 × 105
Polarization curves (a), hydrogen evolution (b) and corrosion rate (c) ofall samples.Corrosion potential (Ecorr), corrosion current density (icorr) and polarization resistance (Rp) calculated according to the polarization curves.According to the corrosion reaction ofMg + H2O → Mg2+ + OH− + H2 (gas), both the hydrogen evolution and the change of pH value can reflect the corrosion rate of the sample[32, 33]. Figure 6b and c exhibit the hydrogen evolution and the corrosion rate ofall samples. The quick hydrogen releasing ofAZ31 alloy was obvious suppressed after surface modification. PEO showed a slower degradation rate than LDH at the start of corrosion. After corroding for 9 d, the corrosion rate ofPEO exceeded LDH. PEO/LDH showed the least hydrogen evolution and lowest corrosion rate, indicating that Mg-Al LDH on the top ofPEO coating can effectively protect the substrate from corroding. The result of pH value changes (Figure S2) is in agreement with that ofhydrogen evolution test. The above results suggest that PEO/LDH coating manifested a most protective ability for the substrate. Many studies ascribed the collapse ofPEO coating mainly to the pores on its surface[34]. Thus, it is vitalfor the coating on the surface ofMg to be compacted and without pores, especially at the initial corrosion stage. In-situ growing a compacted Mg-Al LDH layer on the top of the PEO coating could seal the pores, preventing corrosive medium penetrate into the substrate through the pores and resulting in a more effective protection for the substrate.
Biological Performances
The degradation of sample would lead to a serious change of culture medium, such as excessive Mg and F ions, increased pH value. Bearing this situation in mind, we investigate the influence of these factors to cell viability independently, and the results are showed in Fig. 7.
Figure 7
The influence of pH values (a), concentration of F ions (b) and Mg ions (c) to cell viability. Viability of cells incubated for 1 d (d) and 4 d (e) with different concentration extract of all samples.
The influence of pH values (a), concentration ofF ions (b) and Mg ions (c) to cell viability. Viability of cells incubated for 1 d (d) and 4 d (e) with different concentration extract ofall samples.The pH value ofhuman tissue is in the range of 7~7.4. A high pH value beyond this optimal range would influence cellular metabolism[35]. Here, in the range of pH 7.6~8.8, the cell viability was found to be inversely proportional to the pH value (Fig. 7a). Cell displayed a high sensitivity to F ions (Fig. 7b), with the fact that the cell viability sharply decreased to zero when the concentration ofF ions reached 3.125 mM. The result conforms to our previous study that PEO coating with a high content offluoride would cause great damage to cells[36]. As Mg ions concentration increased, the cell ability first increasing and then decreasing (Fig. 7c). On the one hand, Mg ions can take part in various physiological intracellular reactions[37]. Therefore, a moderate concentration ofMg ions will be favorable for cell proliferation. On the other hand, Mg ions are closely related to the osmolality of the culture medium. As a consequence, excessive Mg ions in the medium will significantly elevate the culture medium osmolality[38], and the drawback of extortionate osmolality will override the positive impact ofMg ions on the cell viability.Figure 7d and e exhibit the viability of cell cultured in different extract for 1 and 4 d, respectively. After incubating for 1 d, all the extracts showed severe cytotoxicity (<60%), especially the extract ofAZ31 (2%) and PEO (15%). However, when incubation time extended to 4 d, the viability of cells in LDH and PEO/LDH extract was larger than 80%, suggesting slight cytotoxicity. In contrast, cells in the extract ofAZ31 and PEO were totally died. Table 3 shows the pH value, concentration ofMg and F ions of the extract. Both pH value and Mg ions concentration ofAZ31 extract were highest among all the extract, explaining the highest cytotoxicity ofAZ31 extract. As for PEO, the pH value and Mg ions concentration decreased while F ions showed up. The F ions concentration were up to 4.74 mM, beyond the threshold value (3.125 mM), and resulted in a huge damage to cells. Applying hydrothermal treatment on PEO coating would reduce the F content of the coating (Table S1), and the formation ofMg-Al LDH would inhibit the release ofF ions. Thus, the F concentration ofPEO/LDH extract (2.42 mM) was only half of the PEO extract and under the threshold value, supporting its slight cytotoxicity (with a cell viability of 90% after 4 d). The cell viability in extract of LDH which contained excessive Mg ions was slightly inferior to that ofPEO/LDH, mainly owing to its significant change of osmolality caused by poorer corrosion resistance.
Table 3
The pH value, concentration of F and Mg ions of the extracts and culture medium.
Culture medium
AZ31
PEO
LDH
PEO/LDH
pH
7.6
8.43
8.09
8.03
8.05
F− (mM)
—
—
4.74
—
2.42
Mg2+ (mM)
0.81
10.53
9.29
9.24
4.95
The pH value, concentration ofF and Mg ions of the extracts and culture medium.The initial cell adherence process was observed by CLSM and the result is displayed in Fig. 8. At the first hour, hardly any cell adhered on the surface ofAZ31, while a certain number of cells adhered onto other samples and showed a round morphology, especially for PEO/LDH, on which cells displayed a more spreading morphology. No obvious changes were observed after 4 h incubation. However, after 24 h, cell morphology on coated samples transferred to polygon and cells on PEO/LDH showed a more spread morphology with numerous filopodia and lamellipodia than those on PEO and LDH. In addition, a larger number of cells were observed on the surface ofPEO/LDH than other samples.
Figure 8
CLSM images of cells cultured on various surfaces for 1, 4 and 24 h with actin stained with FITC (green) and nucleus stained with DAPI (blue).
CLSM images of cells cultured on various surfaces for 1, 4 and 24 h with actin stained with FITC (green) and nucleus stained with DAPI (blue).The results suggest that PEO/LDH coating could enhance the cell adhesion and spreading, presenting a positive affinity to cells. A further confirmation was provided by MC3T3-E1 cells which also showed an enhanced adhesion on the surface ofPEO/LDH (Figure S3).Figure 9 shows the results of live/dead staining. Nearly no living cells were detected on the surfaces ofAZ31 and PEO after 1 d. However, a large number of living cells were observed on the surface of LDH and PEO/LDH, especially on PEO/LDH. After culturing for 4 d, cells on LDH were almost died, while cells on PEO/LDH still remain alive. Furthermore, cells on PEO/LDH could maintain their viability even after 14 d (Figure S4). To further verify the potential application of the prepared films on orthopedic surgeries, we also evaluate the viability ofMC3T3-E1 cells cultured on different samples. The results suggested that MC3T3-E1 cells could survive on LDH and PEO/LDH (Figure S5).
Figure 9
CLSM images of live/dead staining of cell after culturing on various surfaces for 1 and 4 d (green represent live cells and red represent dead cells).
CLSM images of live/dead staining of cell after culturing on various surfaces for 1 and 4 d (green represent live cells and red represent dead cells).The fact that both rBMSCs and MC3T3-E1 cells can successfully adhere and proliferate on the surface ofPEO/LDH sample implies a promising application ofPEO/LDH composite coating in orthopedic surgeries.The quantitative result of cell proliferation cultured on coated samples is depicted in Fig. 10a and corresponding cell morphology in Fig. 10c. Cell proliferation on AZ31 wasn’t measured, given that (i) the results of cell adhesion and live/dead staining indicate that there are no living cells on the surface ofAZ31 after culturing for 4 d, (ii) a large number of released Mg ions from the substrate and pH change of the culture medium would lead to a false positive result[38]. Over the incubation period, there were no cells observed on PEO coating because of plethora ofF ions released from the sample. Cells on LDH showed the highest proliferation in the first 2 d. However, cell number on PEO/LDH enormously increased at 4 d, significantly exceeding that on LDH. At initial culture stage, F ions released from PEO/LDH was suppressed in comparison to PEO, but still possibly do harm to cells, resulting in a lower proliferation rate compared with LDH. After 4 d, the influence ofF ions to cells on PEO/LDHalleviated, and the excessive Mg ions released from LDH would inhibit the viability of cells. Cell morphology (Fig. 10c) clearly showed that cells could only survive on the surface ofPEO/LDH after culturing for 4 d, demonstrating PEO/LDH is more suitable for cell growth and proliferation. The result further confirms the promising application ofPEO/LDH composite coating in orthopedic surgeries.
Figure 10
The proliferation rate (a) and morphology (c) of cells cultured on various surfaces; Hemolysis rate of all samples (b).
The proliferation rate (a) and morphology (c) of cells cultured on various surfaces; Hemolysisrate ofall samples (b).Hemolysisrate (HR), reflecting the degree of erythrocyte destruction, is a pivotal characterization for blood-contacting materials. As shown in Fig. 10b, HR values ofPEO, LDH and PEO/LDH were 2.13 ± 0.71%, 6.16 ± 0.16%, 1.10 ± 0.47%, respectively, which were substantially lower than AZ31 (62.35 ± 3%). The HR value of the sample is closely related to its corrosion behavior and a better corrosion resistance result in a lower HR value[39]. As showed in the result of corrosion rate (Fig. 6c), the corrosion resistance of the samples (PEO/LDH å PEO å LDH å AZ31) exactly in agreement with the HR value. Furthermore, the HR values ofPEO and PEO/LDH were low enough for clinical application (5% is an acceptable value for clinical application).
Drug Delivery
LDHs-based drug delivery systems have been studied for many years[24, 28]. However, almost all these LDHs are in the form of powder. In this work, we fabricated Mg-Al LDH layer on PEO coating and its drug loading ability was measured. The standard curve of5-FU is showed in Fig. 11a. The concentration of5-FU between 0–100 nM is proportional to its intensity of ultraviolet (UV) absorption at 265 nm. After loading 5-FU, samples were immersed in ultrapure water, and the UV absorption spectrum of the resulting solution is showed in Fig. 11b. There was no 5-FU released from PEO. The amount of5-FU released from LDH (20.58 ± 0.73 nM) was almost three times ofPEO/LDH (7.46 ± 0.25 nM). According to the atomic ratios ofAl (Table 1) and the thickness of the coatings (Fig. 5), the amount ofMg-Al LDH structure on LDH is more than that on PEO/LDH, explaining the greater drug loading ability of LDH. Figure 11c depicts the process of loading-releasing 5-FU. When immersed in 5-FU solution, the interlayer anions (mainly consist ofhydroxyl, nitrate and carbonate) ofMg-Al LDH would be replaced by 5-Fu via an ion-exchange process. The loaded 5-FU would release into the surrounding when immersed in an environment without 5-FU. The efficiency of the newly designed drug release platform will be investigated in our future work.
Figure 11
The standard curve of 5-FU (a), the ultraviolet absorption spectrum of the solution after releasing 5-FU, and the process of loading-releasing 5-FU (c).
The standard curve of5-FU (a), the ultraviolet absorption spectrum of the solution after releasing 5-FU, and the process of loading-releasing 5-FU (c).
Conclusions
In summary, we have successfully developed a PEO/LDH composite coating on the surface ofAZ31. The pores ofPEO coating were sealed via in-situ growing Mg-Al LDH. The corrosion resistance of the substrate was remarkably enhanced by PEO/LDH coating. Moreover, the adhesion and proliferation of rBMSCs were improved. The HR value ofPEO/LDH coating was decreased to a clinical application. Finally, the Mg-Al LDH endowed PEO/LDH composite coating a favorable drug delivery ability. The prepared composite coating in this study shows a promising application in orthopedic surgeries.
Materials and Methods
Coating Fabrication
Preparation of PEO Coating
The PEOfilm was grown on AZ31 as previous reported[36]. Briefly, commercialAZ31 was cut into 10 mm × 10 mm × 2 mm and ground with 1000# SiC abrasive paper, and then ultrasonically cleaned with ethyl alcohol, dried in the air. The process was conducted by PEO equipment (Pulsetech, China) with the constant current density of 0.3 A/cm2, frequency of 800 Hz and duty cycle of 10%. The process was stopped at a voltage of 360 V. The electrolyte contained 0.04 M Na2SiO3·9H2O, 0.1 M KOH and 0.2 M KF·2H2O (samples obtained were denoted as PEO).
Preparation of LDH Coating
AZ31 alloy samples and PEO samples were placed in a Teflon-lined stainless at 120 °C for 12 h. The reaction solution were 0.02 M aluminum nitrate (pH = 12.8, adjusted by NaOH). After hydrothermal treatment, obtained samples were denoted as LDH and PEO/LDH, respectively.
Coatings Characterization
The surface and cross-sectional morphologies ofall the coatings were observed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM; Hitachi-S3400N, Hitachi, Japan), and elemental compositions of the samples surfaces were evaluated by energy dispersive spectrometry (EDS; IXRF-550i, IXRF SYSTEMS, USA). Meanwhile, scanning maps ofMg, O, Al, Si, F were also measured by EDS. The phase compositions ofAZ31 alloy, PEO, LDH and PEO/LDH were analyzed by X-ray diffraction (XRD; D/Max, RIGAKU, Tokyo, Japan). TEM analysis was performed using a field emission transmission electron microscope (TEM; JEM-2100F, JEOL Ltd, Tokyo, Japan). The chemical states of surface elements were measured by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, PHI-5000C ESCA system PerkinElmer, USA).
Corrosion Behavior Evaluation
Electrochemical test
Electrochemical corrosion ofall samples was tested using a CHI760C electrochemical analyzer (Shanghai, China) in phosphate buffer saline (PBS). The process was conducted in a three-electrode electrochemical cell with a saturated calomel electrode (SCE) as the reference electrode, a graphite rod as the counter electrode. Ahead of the test, samples were stabilized in PBSfor 400 seconds. The test was conducted at a scanning rate of 10 mV/s with a temperature of 37 °C. The corrosion potential (E
corr), current density (i
corr) and polarization resistance (Rp) were calculated according to Tafel extrapolation.
Hydrogen evolution test
For hydrogen evolution test, six parallel samples for each group were placed in 360 mL PBS at 37 °C. The volume of released hydrogen was recorded up to 24 days. According to the volume ofhydrogen, the corrosion rate of tested samples can be calculated via the following formula:where r is the corrosion rate (mg·cm−2·d−1), P is standard atmospheric pressure (Pa), V is volume ofH2 (mL), R is 8.314 J/(mol·K), T is the temperature (K), M is the molar mass (g/mol), A is the original surface area (cm2), t is the exposure time (day).
Cytocompatibility
The rat bone marrow stem cells (rBMSCs) were used to evaluate the cytocompatibility ofall samples. Cells mentioned in this work refer to rBMSCs ifnot specified. Cells were cultured with α-MEM (Minimum Essential Medium alpha-Medium) at 37 °C in a humidified atmosphere of 5% CO2 in air.
Cytotoxicity evaluation
After sterilized by ultraviolet irradiation, samples were incubated in α-MEM for 24 h with volume/surface ratio of 0.5 cm2/mL. The extracted solution was designated as 100%, diluted to 90%, 60% and 30% with α-MEM. Meanwhile, 100 μL cell suspensions with a cell density of 5 × 104 cell/mL were added to each well of a 96-well culture plate. After 24 h, 100 μL extracted solution with different concentration replace the culture medium and incubated for another 1 and 4 d. α-MEM without extract served as the control group. Cells viability was tested by the alamarBlue assay (AbD Serotec Ltd, UK) according to the manufacturer’s instruction, and calculated using the following equation:where Fs is the fluorescence intensity of the sample group and Fc is the fluorescence intensity of the control group.
Cell adhesion
Cells were seeded on samples at a density of 3 × 104 cells/well. After 1, 4 and 24 h, samples were rinsed with PBS. Then cells were fixed, permeabilized and blocked successively by 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) diluent, 0.1% (v/v) Triton X-100 (Amresco, USA) and 1 wt % bovine serum protein (BSA, Sigma, USA) respectively. Then FITC phalloidin was added to stain F-actin, and DAPI stain nucleus. Samples were rinsed with PBS after each step. Finally, specimens were observed by confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM, Leica SP8, Germany).
Live/Dead Cell Staining
The live/dead cell staining kit (Biovision, USA) was used according to manufacturer’s instructions. Briefly, cells were seeded on the samples with a density of 3 × 104 cells/well, cultured for 1 and 4 d. Then propidium iodide (PI) and calcium-AM were diluted to final concentrations of 5 and 2 μM in PBS, respectively. 100 μL of mixed solution was added to each sample, and cells were observed by CLSM after stained at 37 °C for 15 min.
Cell proliferation and morphology
Cells were seeded on samples with a density of 3 × 104 cells/mL. The proliferation rates of the cells were determined by alamarBlue assay at 1, 2 and 4 d. After 1 and 4 d incubation, samples cultured with cells were dehydrated in a grade ethanol series (30, 50, 75, 90, 95, and 100% v/v) for 10 min, respectively, with finaldehydration conducted in absolute ethanol twice, followed by drying in the hexamethyldisilizane ethanol solution series (1: 2, 2: 1, pure hexamethyldisilizane). Cells morphology was detected by SEM.
Hemolysis Rate Test
The human blood was obtained from healthy adult donors. Samples were placed in a 24-well plate with 1.5 mL 0.9 wt% NaCl solution and kept at 37 °C for 30 min. Untreated 0.9 wt% NaCl and distilled water served as negative and positive controls respectively. After that, the solution was replaced with 30 μL diluted blood (0.8 mL whole blood was diluted with 1 mL 0.9 wt% NaCl solution) and incubated for 1 h. Subsequently, the solution was centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 5 min. The optical density of the supernatant was measured at 545 nm by an enzyme-labeling instrument. The HR was calculated using the following equation:where AS545 is the absorption value of the samples, AN545 is the absorption value of the negative control and AP545 is the absorption value of the positive control.
Drug Delivery Evaluation
5-Fluorouracil (5-FU, Sigma, USA) was used in this test. To transport 5-FU into the interlayer ofMg-Al LDH, samples (PEO, LDH and PEO/LDH) were placed in a 24-well plate, and immersed in 1 mL 5-FU solution (6 μM) for 4 h at 37 °C. After that, samples were rinsed with plenty of deionizedwater, and dry in ambient. Subsequently, samples were immersed in 1 mL ultrapure water to release 5-FU. The amount of released 5-FU was determined according to the standard curve, measured by UV-VIS-NIR Spectrometer (PerkinElmer, USA).
Authors: Kai Zhang; Zhi Ping Xu; Ji Lu; Zhi Yong Tang; Hui Jun Zhao; David A Good; Ming Qian Wei Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2014-04-29 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Dongdong Zhang; Shi Cheng; Ji Tan; Juning Xie; Yu Zhang; Shuhan Chen; Huihui Du; Shi Qian; Yuqing Qiao; Feng Peng; Xuanyong Liu Journal: Bioact Mater Date: 2022-01-27