This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a femtosecond laser on the osteogenetic efficiency of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and its composite for clinical applications.
Methods:
One hundred pieces of PEEK and its composite (6 × 4 × 2 mm3) were randomly divided into four groups and treated as follows: group A1, PEEK; group A2, PEEK + femtosecond laser; group B1, PEEK composite; and group B2, PEEK composite + femtosecond. The surface morphology of the pieces of each group was observed through scanning electron microscopy. The surface roughness and wettability, which were considered as the main parameters affecting cell adhesion characteristics of implants, were measured. The animals whose mandibles were implanted with the four groups of materials were killed at the end of 6 and 12 weeks. Various characterization tests, such as Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT), push-out test, microscope test, and bone implant contact , were conducted to investigate the healing effect between materials and bones.
Results:
In group B1, the nanoparticles in PEEK were uniformly distributed. In groups A2 and B2, many periodic nanostructures were observed. The surface roughness and wettability of group B2 were significantly increased compared to those of the other groups (p < 0.05). At each time point, the number of trabecular bones, contact strength, and BIC of group B2 were higher than those of the three other groups (p < 0.05). Compared with those of group A1, the test results of group B1 were significantly improved.
Conclusion:
Femtosecond lasers can effectively enhance the biological activity of PEEK and its composite; PEEK composite exhibits better biological activity than PEEK.
StockVSchmidlinPRMerkS. PEEK primary crowns with cobalt-chromium, zirconia and galvanic secondary crowns with different tapers—a comparison of retention forces. Materials2016; 9: 187.
4.
MaekawaMKannoZWadaT. Mechanical properties of orthodontic wires made of super engineering plastic. Dent Mater J2015; 34: 114–119.
5.
MaryaKDuaJSChawlaS. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) dental implants: a case for immediate loading. Int J Oral Impl Cli Res2011; 2: 97–103.
6.
SchwitallaAMüllerWD. PEEK dental implants: a review of the literature. J Oral Implantol2013; 39: 743–749.
7.
SagomonyantsKBJarman-SmithMLDevineJN. The in vitro response of human osteoblasts to polyetheretherketone (PEEK) substrates compared to commercially pure titanium. Biomaterials2008; 29: 1563–1572.
8.
WangHXuMZhangW. Mechanical and biological characteristics of diamond-like carbon coated poly aryl-ether-ether-ketone. Biomaterials2010; 31: 8181–8187.
9.
ÖzkurtZKazazoğluE. Clinical success of zirconia in dental applications. J Prosthodont2010; 19: 64–68.
10.
ÖzkurtZKazazoğluE. Zirconia dental implants: a literature review. J Oral Implantol2011; 37: 367–376.
11.
Calvo-GuiradoJLAguilar-SalvatierraAGomez-MorenoG. Histological, radiological and histomorphometric evaluation of immediate vs. non-immediate loading of a zirconia implant with surface treatment in a dog model. Clin Oral Implants Res2014; 25: 826–830.
12.
Abu-BakarMSChengMHTangSM. Tensile properties, tension-tension fatigue and biological response of polyetheretherketone-hydroxyapatite composites for load-bearing orthopedic implants. Biomaterials2003; 24: 2245–2250.
13.
ConverseGLYueWRoederRK. Processing and tensile properties of hydroxyapatite-whisker-reinforced polyetheretherketone. Biomaterials2007; 28: 927–935.
14.
MaRTangSTanH. Preparation, characterization, and in vitro osteoblast functions of a nano-hydroxyapatite/polyetheretherketone biocomposite as orthopedic implant material. Int J Nanomed2014; 9: 3949–3961.
15.
WuXLiuXWeiJ. Nano-TiO2/PEEK bioactive composite as a bone substitute material: in vitro and in vivo studies. Int J Nanomed2012; 7: 1215–1225.
16.
DevineDMHahnJRichardsRG. Coating of carbon fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone implants with titanium to improve bone apposition. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater2013; 101: 591–598.
17.
MaRTangT. Current strategies to improve the bioactivity of PEEK. Int J Mol Sci2014; 15: 5426–5445.
18.
OuyangLPZhaoYJinG. Influence of sulfur content on bone formation and antibacterial ability of sulfonated PEEK. Biomaterials2016; 83: 115–126.
19.
KizukiTMatsushitaTKokuboT. Apatite-forming PEEK with TiO2 surface layer coating. J Mater Sci Mater Med2015; 26: 1–9.
20.
AkkanCKHammadehMEMayA. Surface topography and wetting modifications of PEEK for implant applications. Lasers Med Sci2014; 29: 1633–1639.
21.
JeongYHKimWGChoeHC. Electrochemical behavior of nano and femtosecond laser textured titanium alloy for implant surface modification. J Nanosci Nanotechnol2011; 11: 1581–1584.
22.
ZervaISimitziCSiakouli-GalanopoulouA. Implantable vaccine development using in vitro antigen-pulsed macrophages absorbed on laser micro-structured Si scaffolds. Vaccine2015; 33: 3142–3149.
23.
JunIChungYWHeoYH. Creating hierarchical topographies on fibrous platforms using femtosecond laser ablation for directing myoblasts behavior. ACS Appl Mater Interf2016; 8: 3407–3417.
24.
JeonHKooSReeseWM. Directing cell migration and organization via nanocrater-patterned cell-repellent interfaces. Nat Mater2015; 14: 918–923.
25.
SimitziCEfstathopoulosPKourgiantakiA. Laser fabricated discontinuous anisotropic microconical substrates as a new model scaffold to control the directionality of neuronal network outgrowth. Biomaterials2015; 67: 115–128.
TanKHChuaCKLeongKF. Scaffold development using selective laser sintering of polyetheretherketone-hydroxyapatite biocomposite blends. Biomaterials2003; 24: 3115–3123.
28.
AliuosPFadeevaEBadarM. Evaluation of single-cell force spectroscopy and fluorescence microscopy to determine cell interactions with femtosecond-laser microstructured titanium surfaces. J Biomed Mater Res A2013; 101: 981–990.
ReichUFadeevaEWarneckeA. Directing neuronal cell growth on implant material surfaces by microstructuring. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater2012; 100: 940–947.
31.
HammoutiSBeaugiraudBSalviaM. Elaboration of submicron structures on PEEK polymer by femtosecond laser. Appl Sur Sci2015; 327: 277–287.
32.
NeumannEAVillarCCFrançaFM. Fracture resistance of abutment screws made of titanium, polyetheretherketone and carbon fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone. Braz Oral Res2014; 28: 1–5.
33.
ZhouLQianYZhuY. The effect of different surface treatments on the bond strength of PEEK composite materials. Dent Mater2014; 30: 209–215.
34.
KuboKTsukimuraNIwasaF. Cellular behavior on TiO2 nanonodular structures in a micro-to-nanoscale hierarchy model. Biomaterials2009; 30: 5319–5329.
35.
WebsterTJPatelAARahamanMN. Anti-infective and osteointegration properties of silicon nitride, poly(ether ether ketone), and titanium implants. Acta Biomater2012; 8: 447–454.
36.
BartoldPMKuliwabaJSLeeV. Influence of surface roughness and shape on microdamage of the osseous surface adjacent to titanium dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res2011; 22: 613–618.
NuutinenTSilvennoinenMPäiväsaariK. Control of cultured human cells with femtosecond laser ablated patterns on steel and plastic surfaces. Biomed Microdevices2013; 15: 279–288.
39.
KenarHAkmanEKacarE. Femtosecond laser treatment of 316 L improves its surface nanoroughness and carbon content and promotes osseointegration: an in vitro evaluation. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces2013; 108: 305–312.
40.
RiveiroASotoRComesañaR. Laser surface modification of PEEK. Appl Sur Sci2012; 258: 9437–9442.
41.
PearceAIRichardsRGMilzS. Animal models for implant biomaterial research in bone: a review. Eur Cell Mater2007; 13: 1–10.
42.
Le GuéhennecLSoueidanALayrolleP. Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration. Dent Mater2007; 23(7): 844–854.
43.
Deyneka-DupriezNKocdemirBHerrU. Interfacial shear strength of titanium implants in bone is significantly improved by surface topographies with high pit density and microroughness. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater2007; 82(2): 305–312.
44.
DengYLiuXXuA. Effect of surface roughness on osteogenesis in vitro and osseointegration in vivo of carbon fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone–nanohydroxyapatite composite. Int J Nanomed2015; 10: 1425.
