Modification of PEEK for implants: Strategies to improve mechanical, antibacterial, and osteogenic properties
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Poly-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK), a biomaterial renowned for its mechanical prowess and biocompatibility, is increasingly preferred for medical implants. Its natural bone-like mechanical property, ease of manipulation, and ability to mitigate stress shielding render it a standout replacement for titanium in dental implantology. Adding carbon fiber and graphene to PEEK can further enhance the mechanical properties of PEEK. However, the biological passivity of PEEK hampers its efficacy in bone repair, driving spurring research into surface modifications to enhance its bioactivity. Incorporating metal, inorganic, and organic antimicrobial agents is anticipated to bolster PEEK’s resistance to bacteria, thereby reducing the risk of acute postoperative infections and peri-implantitis. Apart from its antimicrobial activity, researchers have also investigated methods to enhance the osteogenic properties of PEEK. These approaches include surface modification and blending modification. Surface modification includes physical modification, chemical modification, and biologically active substance modification. These methods can further enhance the implant integration and durability, potentially improving patient outcomes. This overview examines PEEK’s processing techniques and highlights recent research achievements in improving its biomechanical, antibacterial, and osteogenic properties. Considering these strides, we argue that modified PEEK holds significant promise as a material for dental implants, charting an encouraging course for its clinical future.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty · Graphene and Nanomaterials Applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Stomatology, China Medical University , Shenyang 110002 , China
Liaoning Provincial Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases , Shenyang 110002 , China
School of Stomatology, Jilin University , Changchun , 130021 , China
References (100+)
Show source-provided references
1. Luo, C., Y. Liu, B. Peng, M. Chen, Z. Liu, Z. Li, et al. PEEK for oral applications: recent advances in mechanical and adhesive properties. Polymers, Vol. 15, 2023, id. 386.10.3390/polym15020386 ↗
2. Zhang, Y. and B. R. Lawn. Novel zirconia materials in dentistry. Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 97, 2018, pp. 140–147.10.1177/0022034517737483 ↗
3. Sailer, I., D. Karasan, A. Todorovic, M. Ligoutsikou, and B. E. Pjetursson. Prosthetic failures in dental implant therapy. Periodontology 2000, Vol. 88, 2022, pp. 130–144.10.1111/prd.12416 ↗
4. Souza, J. C. M., M. B. Sordi, M. Kanazawa, S. Ravindran, B. Henriques, F. S. Silva, et al. Nano-scale modification of titanium implant surfaces to enhance osseointegration. Acta Biomaterialia, Vol. 94, 2019, pp. 112–131.10.1016/j.actbio.2019.05.045 ↗
5. Kaur, M. and K. Singh. Review on titanium and titanium based alloys as biomaterials for orthopaedic applications. Materials Science and Engineering: C, Vol. 102, 2019, pp. 844–862.10.1016/j.msec.2019.04.064 ↗
6. Zol, S. M., M. S. Alauddin, Z. Said, M. I. Mohd Ghazali, L. Hao-Ern, D. A. Mohd Farid, et al. Description of poly(aryl-ether-ketone) materials (PAEKs), polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) for application as a dental material: a materials science review. Polymers, Vol. 15, 2023, id. 2170.10.3390/polym15092170 ↗
7. Padhan, M., U. Marathe, and J. Bijwe. Tribology of poly(etherketone) composites based on nano-particles of solid lubricants. Composites Part B: Engineering, Vol. 201, 2020, id. 108323.10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108323 ↗
8. Verma, S., N. Sharma, S. Kango, and S. Sharma. Developments of PEEK (polyetheretherketone) as a biomedical material: a focused review. European Polymer Journal, Vol. 147, 2021, id. 110295.10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2021.110295 ↗
9. Xu, Q., G. Wang, C. Xiang, X. Cong, X. Gai, S. Zhang, et al. Preparation of a novel poly (ether ether ketone) nonwoven filter and its application in harsh conditions for dust removal. Separation and Purification Technology, Vol. 253, 2020, id. 117555.10.1016/j.seppur.2020.117555 ↗
10. Zhu, Y., Z. Cao, Y. Peng, L. Hu, T. Guney, and B. Tang. Facile surface modification method for synergistically enhancing the biocompatibility and bioactivity of poly(ether ether ketone) that induced osteodifferentiation. ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces, Vol. 11, 2019, pp. 27503–27511.10.1021/acsami.9b03030 ↗
11. Cao, N., Y. Sun, J. Wang, H. Zhang, J. Pang, and Z. Jiang. Strong acid- and solvent-resistant polyether ether ketone separation membranes with adjustable pores. Chemical Engineering Journal, Vol. 386, 2020, id. 124086.10.1016/j.cej.2020.124086 ↗
12. Han, X., W. Gao, Z. Zhou, S. Yang, J. Wang, R. Shi, et al. Application of biomolecules modification strategies on PEEK and its composites for osteogenesis and antibacterial properties. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, Vol. 215, 2022, id. 112492.10.1016/j.colsurfb.2022.112492 ↗
13. Wang, X., J. Guo, J. Wen, X. Zhang, L. Cao, D. Zeng, et al. Novel vascular strategies on polyetheretherketone modification in promoting osseointegration in ovariectomized rats. Materials and Design, Vol. 202, 2021, id. 109526.10.1016/j.matdes.2021.109526 ↗
14. Di Maggio, B., P. Sessa, P. Mantelli, P. Maniscalco, F. Rivera, G. M. Calori, et al. PEEK radiolucent plate for distal radius fractures: multicentre clinical results at 12 months follow up. Injury, Vol. 48, 2017, pp. S34–S38.10.1016/S0020-1383(17)30655-1 ↗
15. Sikder, P., J. A. Ferreira, E. A. Fakhrabadi, K. Z. Kantorski, M. W. Liberatore, M. C. Bottino, et al. Bioactive amorphous magnesium phosphate-polyetheretherketone composite filaments for 3D printing. Dental Materials, Vol. 36, 2020, pp. 865–883.10.1016/j.dental.2020.04.008 ↗
16. Wang, B., M. Huang, P. Dang, J. Xie, X. Zhang, and X. Yan. PEEK in fixed dental prostheses: application and adhesion improvement. Polymers, Vol. 14, 2022, id. 2323.10.3390/polym14122323 ↗
17. Kumar, N., K. G. Lopez, S. Alathur Ramakrishnan, J. T. P. D. Hallinan, J. Y. H. Fuh, N. Pandita, et al. Evolution of materials for implants in metastatic spine disease till date – have we found an ideal material? Radiotherapy and Oncology, Vol. 163, 2021, pp. 93–104.10.1016/j.radonc.2021.08.007 ↗
18. Wang, Z., Y. Wang, J. Yan, K. Zhang, F. Lin, L. Xiang, et al. Pharmaceutical electrospinning and 3D printing scaffold design for bone regeneration. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, Vol. 174, 2021, pp. 504–534.10.1016/j.addr.2021.05.007 ↗
19. Fabris, D., J. P. A. Moura, M. C. Fredel, J. C. M. Souza, F. S. Silva, and B. Henriques. Biomechanical analyses of one‐piece dental implants composed of titanium, zirconia, PEEK, CFR‐PEEK, or GFR‐PEEK: stresses, strains, and bone remodeling prediction by the finite element method. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, Vol. 110, 2022, pp. 79–88.10.1002/jbm.b.34890 ↗
20. Kurtz, S. M. and J. N. Devine. PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials, Vol. 28, 2007, pp. 4845–4869.10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.07.013 ↗
21. Lee, W.-T., J.-Y. Koak, Y.-J. Lim, S.-K. Kim, H.-B. Kwon, and M.-J. Kim. Stress shielding and fatigue limits of poly-ether-ether-ketone dental implants. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, Vol. 100B, 2012, pp. 1044–1052.10.1002/jbm.b.32669 ↗
22. Fabris, D., J. P. A. Moura, M. C. Fredel, J. C. M. Souza, F. S. Silva, and B. Henriques. Biomechanical analyses of one‐piece dental implants composed of titanium, zirconia, PEEK, CFR‐PEEK, or GFR‐PEEK: stresses, strains, and bone remodeling prediction by the finite element method. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, Vol. 110, 2022, pp. 79–88.10.1002/jbm.b.34890 ↗
23. Tsakiris, V., C. Tardei, and F. M. Clicinschi. Biodegradable Mg alloys for orthopedic implants – a review. Journal of Magnesium and Alloys, Vol. 9, 2021, pp. 1884–1905.10.1016/j.jma.2021.06.024 ↗
24. Wang, X., B. Ning, and X. Pei. Tantalum and its derivatives in orthopedic and dental implants: osteogenesis and antibacterial properties. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, Vol. 208, 2021, id. 112055.10.1016/j.colsurfb.2021.112055 ↗
25. Adhikari, S., T. Mukhopadhyay, A. Shaw, and N. P. Lavery. Apparent negative values of Young’s moduli of lattice materials under dynamic conditions. International Journal of Engineering Science, Vol. 150, 2020, id. 103231.10.1016/j.ijengsci.2020.103231 ↗
26. Kedziora, S., T. Decker, E. Museyibov, J. Morbach, S. Hohmann, A. Huwer, et al. Strength properties of 316L and 17-4 PH stainless steel produced with additive manufacturing. Materials, Vol. 15, 2022, id. 6278.10.3390/ma15186278 ↗
27. Han, X., T. Sawada, C. Schille, E. Schweizer, L. Scheideler, J. Geis-Gerstorfer, et al. Comparative analysis of mechanical properties and metal-ceramic bond strength of Co–Cr dental alloy fabricated by different manufacturing processes. Materials, Vol. 11, 2018, id. 1801.10.3390/ma11101801 ↗
28. Hanawa, T. Zirconia versus titanium in dentistry: a review. Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 39, 2020, pp. 24–36.10.4012/dmj.2019-172 ↗
29. Ji, Y., H. Zhang, J. Ru, F. Wang, M. Xu, Q. Zhou, et al. Creating micro-submicro structure and grafting hydroxyl group on PEEK by femtosecond laser and hydroxylation to synergistically activate cellular response. Materials and Design, Vol. 199, 2021, id. 109413.10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109413 ↗
30. Rea, M., S. Ricci, P. Ghensi, N. P. Lang, D. Botticelli, and C. Soldini. Marginal healing using polyetheretherketone as healing abutments: an experimental study in dogs. Clinical Oral Implants, Vol. 28, 2017, pp. 46–50.10.1111/clr.12854 ↗
31. Wang, L., H. He, X. Yang, Y. Zhang, S. Xiong, C. Wang, et al. Bimetallic ions regulated PEEK of bone implantation for antibacterial and osteogenic activities. Materials Today Advances, Vol. 12, 2021, id. 100162.10.1016/j.mtadv.2021.100162 ↗
32. Long, E. G., M. Buluk, M. B. Gallagher, J. M. Schneider, and J. L. Brown. Human mesenchymal stem cell morphology, migration, and differentiation on micro and nano-textured titanium. Bioactive Materials, Vol. 4, 2019, pp. 249–255.10.1016/j.bioactmat.2019.08.001 ↗
33. Wu, D., Q. Miao, Z. Dai, F. Niu, and G. Ma. Effect of voids and crystallinity on the interlaminar shear strength of in-situ manufactured CF/PEEK laminates using repass treatment. Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 224, 2022, id. 109448.10.1016/j.compscitech.2022.109448 ↗
34. Miao, Q., Z. Dai, G. Ma, F. Niu, and D. Wu. CF/PEEK interleaved laminates with PEEK film interleaving manufactured by laser-assisted forming: microstructure and interlaminar shear strength. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, Vol. 172, 2023, id. 107592.10.1016/j.compositesa.2023.107592 ↗
35. Xu, W., S. Jambhulkar, Y. Zhu, D. Ravichandran, M. Kakarla, B. Vernon, et al. 3D printing for polymer/particle-based processing: a review. Composites Part B: Engineering, Vol. 223, 2021, id. 109102.10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.109102 ↗
36. Guo, Z., J. Xie, J. Yang, J. Fu, and P. Zhao. Rapid mold temperature rising method for PEEK microcellular injection molding based on induction heating. Journal of Materials Research and Technology, Vol. 26, 2023, pp. 3285–3300.10.1016/j.jmrt.2023.08.081 ↗
37. Guo, Z., J. Xie, J. Yang, J. Fu, and P. Zhao. Rapid mold temperature rising method for PEEK microcellular injection molding based on induction heating. Journal of Materials Research and Technology, Vol. 26, 2023, pp. 3285–3300.10.1016/j.jmrt.2023.08.081 ↗
38. Chen, Z., Y. Chen, J. Ding, and L. Yu. Blending strategy to modify PEEK-based orthopedic implants. Composites Part B: Engineering, Vol. 250, 2023, id. 110427.10.1016/j.compositesb.2022.110427 ↗
39. Siddiq, A. and A. R. Kennedy. Compression moulding and injection over moulding of porous PEEK components. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, Vol. 111, 2020, id. 103996.10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103996 ↗
40. Van De Werken, N., P. Koirala, J. Ghorbani, D. Doyle, and M. Tehrani. Investigating the hot isostatic pressing of an additively manufactured continuous carbon fiber reinforced PEEK composite. Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 37, 2021, id. 101634.10.1016/j.addma.2020.101634 ↗
41. Lai, J., C. Wang, and M. Wang. 3D printing in biomedical engineering: processes, materials, and applications. Applied Physics Reviews, Vol. 8, 2021, id. 021322.10.1063/5.0024177 ↗
42. Siddiq, A. and A. R. Kennedy. Compression moulding and injection over moulding of porous PEEK components. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, Vol. 111, 2020, id. 103996.10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103996 ↗
43. Van De Werken, N., P. Koirala, J. Ghorbani, D. Doyle, and M. Tehrani. Investigating the hot isostatic pressing of an additively manufactured continuous carbon fiber reinforced PEEK composite. Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 37, 2021, id. 101634.10.1016/j.addma.2020.101634 ↗
44. Han, J., J. Tong, X. Tian, L. Xia, and D. Ma. Thermal simulation and warping deformation experimental study of PEEK in material extrusion. Macro Theory and Simulations, Vol. 30, 2021, id. 2000055.10.1002/mats.202170003 ↗
45. Dua, R., Z. Rashad, J. Spears, G. Dunn, and M. Maxwell. Applications of 3D-printed PEEK via fused filament fabrication: a systematic review. Polymers, Vol. 13, 2021, id. 4046.10.3390/polym13224046 ↗
46. Oladapo, B. I., S. A. Zahedi, S. O. Ismail, and D. B. Olawade. Recent advances in biopolymeric composite materials: future sustainability of bone-implant. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 150, 2021, id. 111505.10.1016/j.rser.2021.111505 ↗
47. Xu, W., S. Jambhulkar, Y. Zhu, D. Ravichandran, M. Kakarla, B. Vernon, et al. 3D printing for polymer/particle-based processing: a review. Composites Part B: Engineering, Vol. 223, 2021, id. 109102.10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.109102 ↗
48. Zhang, L., G. Yang, B. N. Johnson, and X. Jia. Three-dimensional (3D) printed scaffold and material selection for bone repair. Acta Biomaterialia, Vol. 84, 2019, pp. 16–33.10.1016/j.actbio.2018.11.039 ↗
49. Wu, W., J. Xin, B. Hu, R. Chen, D. Huang, Z. Huang, et al. Achieving injection molding interlayer strength via powder assisted hot isostatic pressing in material extrusion polyetheretherketone. Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 74, 2023, id. 103735.10.1016/j.addma.2023.103735 ↗
50. Lai, J., C. Wang, and M. Wang. 3D printing in biomedical engineering: processes, materials, and applications. Applied Physics Reviews, Vol. 8, 2021, id. 021322.10.1063/5.0024177 ↗
51. Dua, R., Z. Rashad, J. Spears, G. Dunn, and M. Maxwell. Applications of 3D-printed PEEK via fused filament fabrication: a systematic review. Polymers, Vol. 13, 2021, id. 4046.10.3390/polym13224046 ↗
52. Verma, S., N. Sharma, S. Kango, and S. Sharma. Developments of PEEK (polyetheretherketone) as a biomedical material: a focused review. European Polymer Journal, Vol. 147, 2021, id. 110295.10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2021.110295 ↗
53. Van De Werken, N., P. Koirala, J. Ghorbani, D. Doyle, and M. Tehrani. Investigating the hot isostatic pressing of an additively manufactured continuous carbon fiber reinforced PEEK composite. Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 37, 2021, id. 101634.10.1016/j.addma.2020.101634 ↗
54. Torstrick, F. B., A. S. P. Lin, D. Potter, D. L. Safranski, T. A. Sulchek, K. Gall, et al. Porous PEEK improves the bone-implant interface compared to plasma-sprayed titanium coating on PEEK. Biomaterials, Vol. 185, 2018, pp. 106–116.10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.09.009 ↗
55. Sun, Y., S. Zhou, G. Qin, J. Guo, Q. Zhang, S. Li, et al. A chemical-induced crystallization strategy to fabricate poly(ether ether ketone) asymmetric membranes for organic solvent nanofiltration. Journal of Membrane Science, Vol. 620, 2021, id. 118899.10.1016/j.memsci.2020.118899 ↗
56. Hughes, E. A. B. and L. M. Grover. Characterisation of a novel poly (ether ether ketone)/calcium sulphate composite for bone augmentation. Biomaterial Research, Vol. 21, 2017, id. 7.10.1186/s40824-017-0093-7 ↗
57. Corni, I., N. Neumann, S. Novak, K. König, P. Veronesi, Q. Chen, et al. Electrophoretic deposition of PEEK-nano alumina composite coatings on stainless steel. Surface and Coatings Technology, Vol. 203, 2009, pp. 1349–1359.10.1016/j.surfcoat.2008.11.005 ↗
58. Han, X., D. Yang, C. Yang, S. Spintzyk, L. Scheideler, P. Li, et al. Carbon fiber reinforced PEEK composites based on 3D-printing technology for orthopedic and dental applications. JCM, Vol. 8, 2019, id. 240.10.3390/jcm8020240 ↗
59. Hamada, T., H. Fukasawa, S. Hasegawa, A. Miyashita, and Y. Maekawa. Graft-type polymer electrolyte membranes based on poly(ether ether ketone)/nanosilica hybrid films for fuel cell applications. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Vol. 41, 2016, pp. 18621–18630.10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.08.039 ↗
60. Gao, S., S. Gao, B. Xu, and H. Yu. Effects of different pH-values on the nanomechanical surface properties of PEEK and CFR–PEEK compared to dental resin-based materials. Materials, Vol. 8, 2015, pp. 4751–4767.10.3390/ma8084751 ↗
61. Kurtz, S. M. and J. N. Devine. PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials, Vol. 28, 2007, pp. 4845–4869.10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.07.013 ↗
62. Sariyev, B., A. Abdikadyr, T. Baitikenov, Y. Anuarbekov, B. Golman, and C. Spitas. Thermal properties and mechanical behavior of hot pressed PEEK/graphite thin film laminate composites. Scientific Reports, Vol. 13, 2023, id. 12785.10.1038/s41598-023-39905-w ↗
63. Hu, C., D. Ashok, D. R. Nisbet, and V. Gautam. Bioinspired surface modification of orthopedic implants for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials, Vol. 219, 2019, id. 119366.10.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.119366 ↗
64. Chen, B., J. Wang, and F. Yan. Comparative investigation on the tribological behaviors of CF/PEEK composites under sea water lubrication. Tribology International, Vol. 52, 2012, pp. 170–177.10.1016/j.triboint.2012.03.017 ↗
65. Andrew, J. J., H. Alhashmi, A. Schiffer, S. Kumar, and V. S. Deshpande. Energy absorption and self-sensing performance of 3D printed CF/PEEK cellular composites. Materials and Design, Vol. 208, 2021, id. 109863.10.1016/j.matdes.2021.109863 ↗
66. Qin, W., Y. Li, J. Ma, Q. Liang, X. Cui, H. Jia, et al. Osseointegration and biosafety of graphene oxide wrapped porous CF/PEEK composites as implantable materials: the role of surface structure and chemistry. Dental Materials, Vol. 36, 2020, pp. 1289–1302.10.1016/j.dental.2020.06.004 ↗
67. Yang, D., Y. Cao, Z. Zhang, Y. Yin, and D. Li. Effects of crystallinity control on mechanical properties of 3D-printed short-carbon-fiber-reinforced polyether ether ketone composites. Polymer Testing, Vol. 97, 2021, id. 107149.10.1016/j.polymertesting.2021.107149 ↗
68. Hassan, E. A. M., D. Ge, S. Zhu, L. Yang, J. Zhou, and M. Yu. Enhancing CF/PEEK composites by CF decoration with polyimide and loosely-packed CNT arrays. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, Vol. 127, 2019, id. 105613.10.1016/j.compositesa.2019.105613 ↗
69. Chen, J., K. Wang, and Y. Zhao. Enhanced interfacial interactions of carbon fiber reinforced PEEK composites by regulating PEI and graphene oxide complex sizing at the interface. Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 154, 2018, pp. 175–186.10.1016/j.compscitech.2017.11.005 ↗
70. Chen, Z., Y. Chen, J. Ding, and L. Yu. Blending strategy to modify PEEK-based orthopedic implants. Composites Part B: Engineering, Vol. 250, 2023, id. 110427.10.1016/j.compositesb.2022.110427 ↗
71. Su, Y., S. Zhang, X. Zhang, Z. Zhao, and D. Jing. Preparation and properties of carbon nanotubes/carbon fiber/poly (ether ether ketone) multiscale composites. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, Vol. 108, 2018, pp. 89–98.10.1016/j.compositesa.2018.02.030 ↗
72. Ata, S., Y. Hayashi, T. B. Nguyen Thi, S. Tomonoh, S. Kawauchi, T. Yamada, et al. Improving thermal durability and mechanical properties of poly(ether ether ketone) with single-walled carbon nanotubes. Polymer, Vol. 176, 2019, pp. 60–65.10.1016/j.polymer.2019.05.028 ↗
73. Rong, C., G. Ma, S. Zhang, L. Song, Z. Chen, G. Wang, et al. Effect of carbon nanotubes on the mechanical properties and crystallization behavior of poly(ether ether ketone). Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 70, 2010, pp. 380–386.10.1016/j.compscitech.2009.11.024 ↗
74. Theiler, G. and T. Gradt. Environmental effects on the sliding behaviour of PEEK composites. Wear, Vol. 368–369, 2016, pp. 278–286.10.1016/j.wear.2016.09.019 ↗
75. Gong, F., K. Bui, D. V. Papavassiliou, and H. M. Duong. Thermal transport phenomena and limitations in heterogeneous polymer composites containing carbon nanotubes and inorganic nanoparticles. Carbon, Vol. 78, 2014, pp. 305–316.10.1016/j.carbon.2014.07.007 ↗
76. Mohammed, A. S. and M. I. Fareed. Improving the friction and wear of poly-ether-etherketone (PEEK) by using thin nano-composite coatings. Wear, Vol. 364–365, 2016, pp. 154–162.10.1016/j.wear.2016.07.012 ↗
77. Feng, P., J. Jia, S. Peng, W. Yang, S. Bin, and C. Shuai. Graphene oxide-driven interfacial coupling in laser 3D printed PEEK/PVA scaffolds for bone regeneration. Virtual and Physical Prototyping, Vol. 15, 2020, pp. 211–226.10.1080/17452759.2020.1719457 ↗
78. He, M., X. Chen, Z. Guo, X. Qiu, Y. Yang, C. Su, et al. Super tough graphene oxide reinforced polyetheretherketone for potential hard tissue repair applications. Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 174, 2019, pp. 194–201.10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.02.028 ↗
79. Awaja, F., M. Tripathi, T. Wong, T. O’Brien, and G. Speranza. The chemistry and topography of stabilized and functionalized graphene oxide coatings. Plasma Processes and Polymers, Vol. 15, 2018, id. 1800084.10.1002/ppap.201800084 ↗
80. Shen, Y., L. Liang, S. Zhang, D. Huang, J. Zhang, S. Xu, et al. Organelle-targeting surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) nanosensors for subcellular pH sensing. Nanoscale, Vol. 10, 2018, pp. 1622–1630.10.1039/C7NR08636A ↗
81. Ouyang, L., Y. Deng, L. Yang, X. Shi, T. Dong, Y. Tai, et al. Graphene‐oxide‐decorated microporous polyetheretherketone with superior antibacterial capability and in vitro osteogenesis for orthopedic implant. Macromolecular Bioscience, Vol. 18, 2018, id. 1800036.10.1002/mabi.201800036 ↗
82. Wang, S., X. Zhao, Y. Hsu, Y. He, F. Wang, F. Yang, et al. Surface modification of titanium implants with Mg-containing coatings to promote osseointegration. Acta Biomaterialia, 2023, id. S1742706123004397.10.1016/j.actbio.2023.07.048 ↗
83. Kotsakis, G. A. and D. G. Olmedo. Peri‐implantitis is not periodontitis: scientific discoveries shed light on microbiome‐biomaterial interactions that may determine disease phenotype. Periodontol 2000, Vol. 86, 2021, pp. 231–240.10.1111/prd.12372 ↗
84. Wu, S., J. Xu, L. Zou, S. Luo, R. Yao, B. Zheng, et al. Long-lasting renewable antibacterial porous polymeric coatings enable titanium biomaterials to prevent and treat peri-implant infection. Nature Commununication, Vol. 12, 2021, id. 3303.10.1038/s41467-021-23069-0 ↗
85. Baker, J. L., B. Bor, M. Agnello, W. Shi, and X. He. Ecology of the oral microbiome: beyond bacteria. Trends in Microbiology, Vol. 25, 2017, pp. 362–374.10.1016/j.tim.2016.12.012 ↗
86. Gao, L., T. Xu, G. Huang, S. Jiang, Y. Gu, and F. Chen. Oral microbiomes: more and more importance in oral cavity and whole body. Protein Cell, Vol. 9, 2018, pp. 488–500.10.1007/s13238-018-0548-1 ↗
87. Gulati, K., D. Chopra, N. A. Kocak-Oztug, and E. Verron. Fit and forget: the future of dental implant therapy via nanotechnology. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, Vol. 199, 2023, id. 114900.10.1016/j.addr.2023.114900 ↗
88. Mazmanian, S. K., C. H. Liu, A. O. Tzianabos, and D. L. Kasper. An immunomodulatory molecule of symbiotic bacteria directs maturation of the host immune system. Cell, Vol. 122, 2005, pp. 107–118.10.1016/j.cell.2005.05.007 ↗
89. Huang, Y., Y. Liu, S. Shah, D. Kim, A. Simon-Soro, T. Ito, et al. Precision targeting of bacterial pathogen via bi-functional nanozyme activated by biofilm microenvironment. Biomaterials, Vol. 268, 2021, id. 120581.10.1016/j.biomaterials.2020.120581 ↗
90. Le, N.-H., V. Pinedo, J. Lopez, F. Cava, and M. F. Feldman. Killing of gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria by a bifunctional cell wall-targeting T6SS effector. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U S A, Vol. 118, 2021, id. e2106555118.10.1073/pnas.2106555118 ↗
91. Shaikh, S., N. Nazam, S. M. D. Rizvi, K. Ahmad, M. H. Baig, E. J. Lee, et al. Mechanistic insights into the antimicrobial actions of metallic nanoparticles and their implications for multidrug resistance. IJMS, Vol. 20, 2019, id. 2468.10.3390/ijms20102468 ↗
92. Lee, S. and B.-H. Jun. Silver nanoparticles: synthesis and application for nanomedicine. IJMS, Vol. 20, 2019, id. 865.10.3390/ijms20040865 ↗
93. Qin, Z., Y. Zheng, Y. Wang, T. Du, C. Li, X. Wang, et al. Versatile roles of silver in Ag-based nanoalloys for antibacterial applications. Coordination Chemistry Reviews, Vol. 449, 2021, id. 214218.10.1016/j.ccr.2021.214218 ↗
94. Kędziora, A., M. Speruda, E. Krzyżewska, J. Rybka, A. Łukowiak, and G. Bugla-Płoskońska. Similarities and differences between silver ions and silver in nanoforms as antibacterial agents. IJMS, Vol. 19, 2018, id. 444.10.3390/ijms19020444 ↗
95. Roy, A., O. Bulut, S. Some, A. K. Mandal, and M. D. Yilmaz. Green synthesis of silver nanoparticles: biomolecule-nanoparticle organizations targeting antimicrobial activity. RSC Advances, Vol. 9, 2019, pp. 2673–2702.10.1039/C8RA08982E ↗
96. Liu, X., K. Gan, H. Liu, X. Song, T. Chen, and C. Liu. Antibacterial properties of nano-silver coated PEEK prepared through magnetron sputtering. Dental Materials, Vol. 33, 2017, pp. e348–e360.10.1016/j.dental.2017.06.014 ↗
97. Deng, L., Y. Deng, and K. Xie. AgNPs-decorated 3D printed PEEK implant for infection control and bone repair. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, Vol. 160, 2017, pp. 483–492.10.1016/j.colsurfb.2017.09.061 ↗
98. Girard, J., N. Joset, A. Crochet, M. Tan, A. Holzheu, P. Brunetto, et al. Synthesis of new polyether ether ketone derivatives with silver binding site and coordination compounds of their monomers with different silver salts. Polymers, Vol. 8, 2016, id. 208.10.3390/polym8060208 ↗
99. Yu, Y., Y. Sun, X. Zhou, Y. Mao, Y. Liu, L. Ye, et al. Ag and peptide Co-decorate polyetheretherketone to enhance antibacterial property and osteogenic differentiation. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, Vol. 198, 2021, id. 111492.10.1016/j.colsurfb.2020.111492 ↗
100. Nawaz, Q., S. Fastner, M. A. U. Rehman, S. Ferraris, S. Perero, G. G. Di Confiengo, et al. Multifunctional stratified composite coatings by electrophoretic deposition and RF Co-sputtering for orthopaedic implants. Journal of Materials Science, Vol. 56, 2021, pp. 7920–7935.10.1007/s10853-020-05725-w ↗