| Literature DB >> 35591624 |
Xuan Guo1, Yunpeng Hu1, Kezhen Yuan1, Yang Qiao1.
Abstract
Magnesium alloy, as an absorbable and implantable biomaterial, has been greatly developed in the application field of biomaterials in recent years due to its excellent biocompatibility and biomechanics. However, due to the poor corrosion resistance of magnesium alloy in the physiological environment, the degradation rate will be unbalanced, which seriously affects the clinical use. There are two main ways to improve the corrosion resistance of magnesium alloy: one is by adding alloying elements, the other is by surface modification technology. Compared with adding alloy elements, the surface coating modification has the following advantages: (1) The surface coating modification is carried out without changing the matrix elements of magnesium alloy, avoiding the introduction of other elements; (2) The corrosion resistance of magnesium alloy can be improved by relatively simple physical, chemical, or electrochemical improvement. From the perspective of corrosion resistance and biocompatibility of biomedical magnesium alloy materials, this paper summarizes the application and characteristics of six different surface coating modifications in the biomedical magnesium alloy field, including chemical conversion method, micro-arc oxidation method, sol-gel method, electrophoretic deposition, hydrothermal method, and thermal spraying method. In the last section, it looks forward to the development prospect of surface coating modification and points out that preparing modified coatings on the implant surface combined with various modification post-treatment technologies is the main direction to improve biocompatibility and realize clinical functionalization.Entities:
Keywords: biocompatibility; corrosion resistance; implantable bio-metal materials; magnesium alloy; surface coating modification
Year: 2022 PMID: 35591624 PMCID: PMC9100161 DOI: 10.3390/ma15093291
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.748
Figure 1Comparison diagram of newly-born bone cells coated with (a,b) calcium phosphate around the culture. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [24]. Copyright 2019 Copyright Elsevier.
Figure 2Mouse fibroblasts on Mg surface that had been pre-treated by soaking in M-SBF at 37 °C for 5 days. Fluorescence imaging of cells and cell spreading area as a function of culture time. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [25]. Copyright 2009 Copyright Elsevier.
Figure 3SEM surface morphology of the magnesium fluoride-coated materials after 11 days of immersion in DMEM: (a) PM Mg, (b) cast Mg, and (c) AZ31 alloy. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [27]. Copyright 2011 Copyright Elsevier.
Figure 4SEM images of blood platelet adhesion on the micro-arc oxidation (MAO) coating HA-containing coating: (a) SEM images with scale of 10μm, (b) SEM images with scale of 2μm. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [42]. Copyright 2018 Copyright Elsevier.
Figure 5SEM analyses of (a) uncoated AZ31, (b) Nb2O5 coated AZ31 substrate. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [55]. Copyright 2014 Copyright Elsevier.
Figure 6DAPI staining of nuclei of live osteoblast cells showing blue fluorescence on (a) uncoated and (b) Nb2O5 coated substrates after incubation with MG63 osteoblast cells for 24 h and (c) nuclei of live cells observed on Nb2O5 coated substrate after 48 h of incubation with MG63 osteoblast cells. (Ethidium bromide/acridine orange combined stain causes live cells to fluoresce green, whereas apoptotic cells cause the distinctive red-orange fluorescence.) Reprinted with permission from Ref. [55]. Copyright 2014 Copyright Elsevier.
Figure 7Comparison of SEM micrographs of Mg alloy coated with HAP and uncoated with HAP: (a) Mg alloy uncoated with HAP, (b) Mg alloy coated with HAP. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [65]. Copyright 2020 Copyright Elsevier.
Figure 8Shows the SEM micrograph of superhydrophobic hydroxyapatite coating. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [67]. Copyright 2018 Copyright Elsevier.
Figure 9(a) Surface morphology of coating, (b) microstructure of coating section. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [82]. Copyright 2018 Copyright Elsevier.
Comparison of modification methods of medical magnesium alloy surface coating.
| Method | Chemical | Microarc | Sol Coagulation | Electrophoretic Deposition | Hydrothermal Method | Thermal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concept | The material itself is transformed into a coating through chemical changes. | High-voltage plasma assisted anodic oxidation process. | The liquid is converted into gel and then oxidized into a solid. | Particles are deposited on the surface of the substrate by direct current electric field. | With water as solvent, the powder is dissolved and recrystallized. | The powder is deposited on the surface at high temperature and high speed. |
| Adv. | The coating has good binding force and low cost. | With high hardness, it is often used as the base coat of the first step. | Uniform film formation, often used as the second step sealing coating. | Uniform coat can be prepared on a substrate with complex shape. | Avoids impurity entry and defect growth in that calcination process. | High deposition rate, uniform coating. |
| Disad. | Porous, cracked, and pollutes the environment. | Characteristic micropores make it corrosion-resistant. | Results in thermal stress cracking of the coating. | Large investment, difficult process control. | High equipment requirements and technical difficulties. | Poor bonding strength and environmental pollution. |
| Feature | Self-transformation, good binding force. | Coating with high hardness and abrasion resistance. | As the second step of sealing coating. | Avoid embrittlement caused by high temperature. | Coating has high sintering activity. | Improving metallographic structure and corrosion resistance. |
| Number | 992 | 693 | 559 | 618 | 394 | 188 |