journal article·2020-07-08Open access

Fabrication of Microporous Coatings on Titanium Implants with Improved Mechanical, Antibacterial, and Cell-Interactive Properties

Monica Thukkaram, Renee Coryn, Mahtab Asadian, Parinaz Saadat Esbah Tabaei, Petra Rigole, Naveenkumar Rajendhran, Anton Nikiforov, Jacob Sukumaran, Tom Coenye, Pascal Van Der Voort, Gijs Du Laing, Rino Morent, Alexander Van Tongel, Lieven De Wilde, Patrick De Baets, Kim Verbeken, Nathalie De Geyter

ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces· Volume 12· Issue 27

Abstract

The success of an orthopedic implant therapy depends on successful bone integration and the prevention of microbial infections. In this work, plasma electrolytic oxidation (PEO) was performed to deposit TiO2 coatings enriched with Ca, P, and Ag on titanium to improve its surface properties and antibacterial efficacy while maintaining normal biological functions and thus to enhance the performance of orthopedic implants. After PEO treatment, the surface of Ti was converted to anatase and rutile TiO2, hydroxyapatite, and calcium titanate phases. The presence of these crystalline phases was further increased with an increased Ag content in the coatings. The developed coatings also exhibited a more porous morphology with an improved surface wettability, roughness, microhardness, and frictional coefficient. In vitro antibacterial assays indicated that the Ag-doped coatings can significantly prevent the growth of both Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli by releasing Ag+ ions, and the ability to prevent these bacteria was enhanced by increasing the Ag content in the coatings, resulting in a maximal 6-log reduction of E. coli and a maximal 5-log reduction of S. aureus after 24 h of incubation. Moreover, the in vitro cytocompatibility evaluation of the coatings showed that the osteoblast (MC3T3) cell integration on the PEO-based coatings was greatly improved compared to untreated Ti and no notable impact on their cytocompatibility was observed on increasing the amount of Ag in the coating. In conclusion, the coating with favorable physicochemical and mechanical properties along with controlled silver ion release can offer an excellent antibacterial performance and osteocompatibility and can thus become a prospective coating strategy to face current challenges in orthopedics.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · Nanoparticles: synthesis and applications · Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Research Unit Plasma Technology (RUPT), Department of Applied Physics, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Ghent University, Ghent 9000, Belgium

Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Microbiology, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent 9000, Belgium

Soete Laboratory, Department of Electrical Energy, Metals, Mechanical Construction and Systems (EEMMeCS), Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Ghent University, Ghent 9000, Belgium

Centre for Ordered Materials, Organometallics and Catalysis (COMOC), Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent 9000, Belgium

Department of Green Chemistry and Technology, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Ghent 9000, Belgium

Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Department of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent 9000, Belgium

Department of Materials, Textiles and Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Ghent University, Ghent 9000, Belgium

Funding

Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek

References (69)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.3390/jfb804004410.3390/jfb8040044 ↗
2. 10.1186/1471-2474-13-3210.1186/1471-2474-13-32 ↗
3. 10.1007/BF0256166510.1007/BF02561665 ↗
4. 10.2147/IDR.S17724710.2147/IDR.S177247 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2019.14423510.1016/j.apsusc.2019.144235 ↗
6. 10.3390/coatings703004510.3390/coatings7030045 ↗
7. 10.3349/ymj.2014.55.2.28310.3349/ymj.2014.55.2.283 ↗
8. 10.2147/IJN.S16512510.2147/IJN.S165125 ↗
9. 10.1186/2228-5326-2-3210.1186/2228-5326-2-32 ↗
10. Coester L. M. · Iowa Orthop. J. · 2006 · 26 · 48
11. 10.1038/s41565-017-0013-y10.1038/s41565-017-0013-y ↗
12. 10.1016/j.cca.2010.08.01610.1016/j.cca.2010.08.016 ↗
13. 10.3109/1040844090345307410.3109/10408440903453074 ↗
14. 10.1002/jbm.a.3608110.1002/jbm.a.36081 ↗
15. Adeleke S. A. · J. Eng. Appl. Sci. · 2015 · 10 · 10101
16. 10.1155/2012/73069310.1155/2012/730693 ↗
17. 10.1021/acsami.9b2323710.1021/acsami.9b23237 ↗
18. 10.1002/jbm.b.3146310.1002/jbm.b.31463 ↗
19. 10.1016/S0257-8972(99)00441-710.1016/S0257-8972(99)00441-7 ↗
20. 10.1016/S0257-8972(00)00719-210.1016/S0257-8972(00)00719-2 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.09.04810.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.09.048 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.12.02210.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.12.022 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.electacta.2015.05.07510.1016/j.electacta.2015.05.075 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2016.09.00210.1016/j.surfcoat.2016.09.002 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2015.07.05310.1016/j.surfcoat.2015.07.053 ↗
26. 10.1007/s10856-011-4535-910.1007/s10856-011-4535-9 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.actbio.2011.02.03710.1016/j.actbio.2011.02.037 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.actbio.2011.09.03110.1016/j.actbio.2011.09.031 ↗
29. 10.1103/PhysRevB.15.168010.1103/PhysRevB.15.1680 ↗
30. 10.1016/0009-2614(79)87231-010.1016/0009-2614(79)87231-0 ↗
31. 10.1016/S0022-0248(01)01782-110.1016/S0022-0248(01)01782-1 ↗
32. Moulder J. F. · 1995
33. 10.1016/J.ACTBIO.2008.03.00510.1016/J.ACTBIO.2008.03.005 ↗
34. 10.1002/jbm.a.3187710.1002/jbm.a.31877 ↗
35. 10.3390/ma706410510.3390/ma7064105 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.jallcom.2012.11.02410.1016/j.jallcom.2012.11.024 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2007.07.09110.1016/j.surfcoat.2007.07.091 ↗
38. 10.1039/C6TB00563B10.1039/C6TB00563B ↗
39. 10.1016/j.triboint.2005.08.00410.1016/j.triboint.2005.08.004 ↗
40. 10.1007/BF0264710510.1007/BF02647105 ↗
41. 10.20964/2016.07.1710.20964/2016.07.17 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2018.10.06710.1016/j.surfcoat.2018.10.067 ↗
43. 10.1016/S1003-6326(16)64089-X10.1016/S1003-6326(16)64089-X ↗
44. 10.1002/sca.2121210.1002/sca.21212 ↗
45. 10.3390/coatings711019110.3390/coatings7110191 ↗
46. 10.1186/ar217010.1186/ar2170 ↗
47. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.07.01210.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.07.012 ↗
48. Abdullaeva Z. · 201710.1002/9783527807024 ↗
49. 10.1016/J.MSEC.2015.05.07810.1016/J.MSEC.2015.05.078 ↗
50. 10.1007/s00423-009-0472-110.1007/s00423-009-0472-1 ↗
51. 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2008.09.00210.1016/j.biotechadv.2008.09.002 ↗
52. 10.1128/AEM.02001-0710.1128/AEM.02001-07 ↗
53. 10.1016/j.jcis.2004.02.01210.1016/j.jcis.2004.02.012 ↗
54. 10.1021/es903555710.1021/es9035557 ↗
55. 10.1088/1748-6041/10/4/04501210.1088/1748-6041/10/4/045012 ↗
56. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199804)40:1<24::AID-JBM3>3.0.CO;2-T10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199804)40:1<24::AID-JBM3>3.0.CO;2-T ↗
57. 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.8b0099610.1021/acsbiomaterials.8b00996 ↗
58. Sun, Z. L.; Bai, L.; Guan, G. P.; Zhuan, K. H.; Dai, H. Q. Protein Adsorption and Biocompatibility of Porous Silk Fiboin Films. Proceedings of the 2009 2nd International Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Informatics, BMEI 2009, 2009.10.1109/BMEI.2009.5305691 ↗
59. 10.1039/c5cp02306h10.1039/c5cp02306h ↗
60. 10.1016/s0142-9612(98)00184-710.1016/s0142-9612(98)00184-7 ↗
61. 10.1016/S0162-0134(03)00094-110.1016/S0162-0134(03)00094-1 ↗
62. 10.2209/tdcpublication.53.4510.2209/tdcpublication.53.45 ↗
63. 10.2209/tdcpublication.53.4510.2209/tdcpublication.53.45 ↗
64. 10.1590/s0103-6440201000060000110.1590/s0103-64402010000600001 ↗
65. 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1995.060101.x10.1034/j.1600-0501.1995.060101.x ↗
66. 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2020.12548310.1016/j.surfcoat.2020.125483 ↗
67. 10.1038/srep3176910.1038/srep31769 ↗
68. 10.1002/jbm.a.3421510.1002/jbm.a.34215 ↗
69. ISO - ISO 10993-5:2009 - Biological evaluation of medical devices — Part 5: Tests for in vitro cytotoxicity. https://www.iso.org/standard/36406.html (accessed Dec 17, 2019).