Cytocompatibility, osseointegration, and bioactivity of three-dimensional porous and nanostructured network on polyetheretherketone

Biomaterials

Volumn 34, Issue 37, 2013, Pages 9264-9277

  Zhao, Ying ^a,b   Wong, Hoi Man ^a   Wang, Wenhao ^a,b   Li, Penghui ^b   Xu, Zushun ^b,c   Chong, Eva Y W ^a   Yan, Chun Hoi ^a,d   Yeung, Kelvin W K ^a,d   Chu, Paul K ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^c HUBEI UNIVERSITY   (China)

^d THE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG SHENZHEN HOSPITAL   (China)

Author keywords

Bioactivity; Biocompatibility; Interface; Osseointegration; Polyetheretherketone; Surface modification

Indexed keywords

CELLULAR BEHAVIORS; CHEMICAL COMPOSITIONS; NANOSTRUCTURED NETWORKS; OSSEOINTEGRATION; OSTEOGENIC DIFFERENTIATION; SURFACE CHARACTERISTICS; SURFACE FUNCTIONALIZATION; THREE-DIMENSIONAL (3D) SURFACES;

ACETONE; APATITE; BIOACTIVITY; BIOCOMPATIBILITY; BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS; BONE; CELL ADHESION; CELL PROLIFERATION; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; FUNCTIONAL GROUPS; INTERFACES (MATERIALS); PHOTOELECTRONS; POLYETHER ETHER KETONES; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; SULFONATION; SURFACE TREATMENT; TISSUE ENGINEERING; X RAY PHOTOELECTRON SPECTROSCOPY;

THREE DIMENSIONAL;

APATITE; NANOMATERIAL; POLYETHERETHERKETONE; POROUS POLYMER;

ANIMAL CELL; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; BIOCOMPATIBILITY; BIOLOGICAL ACTIVITY; BONE GROWTH; BONE REGENERATION; CELL ADHESION; CELL ASSAY; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL FUNCTION; CELL PH; CELL PROLIFERATION; CELL SURFACE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; IN VITRO STUDY; IN VIVO STUDY; INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY; MICRO-COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; MOUSE; NANOFABRICATION; NONHUMAN; OSTEOBLAST; POROSITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RAT; REAL TIME POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; REVERSE TRANSCRIPTION POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; SULFONATION; WATER IMMERSION; X RAY PHOTOELECTRON SPECTROSCOPY;

BIOACTIVITY; BIOCOMPATIBILITY; INTERFACE; OSSEOINTEGRATION; POLYETHERETHERKETONE; SURFACE MODIFICATION;

ANIMALS; BIOCOMPATIBLE MATERIALS; CELL ADHESION; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL LINE; CELL SURVIVAL; FEMALE; KETONES; MICE; NANOSTRUCTURES; OSSEOINTEGRATION; OSTEOBLASTS; POLYETHYLENE GLYCOLS; POROSITY; RATS; RATS, SPRAGUE-DAWLEY; SURFACE PROPERTIES; TISSUE SCAFFOLDS;

EID: 84884812594     PISSN: 01429612     EISSN: 18785905     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.08.071     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Liu X.Y., Chu P.K., Ding C.X. Surface modification of titanium, titanium alloys, and related materials for biomedical applications. Mater Sci Eng R 2004, 47:49-121.
2. Sagomonyants K.B., Smith M.L.J., Devine J.N., Aronow M.S., Gronowicz G.A. The invitro response of human osteoblasts to polyetheretherketone (PEEK) substrates compared to commercially pure titanium. Biomaterials 2008, 29:1563-1572.
3. Kurtz S.M., Devine J.N. PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials 2007, 28:4845-4869.
4. Williams D. Polyetheretherketone for long-term implantable devices. Med Device Technol 2008, 19(1):8-11.
5. Toth J.M., Wang M., Estes B.T., Scifert J.L., Seim H.B., Turner A.S. Polyetheretherketone as a biomaterial for spinal applications. Biomaterials 2006, 27:324-334.
6. Xing P., Robertson G.P., Guiver M.D., Mikhailenko S.D., Wang K., Kaliaguine S. Synthesis and characterization of sulfonated poly(ether ether ketone) for proton exchange membranes. JMemb Sci 2004, 229:95-106.
7. Sobieraj M.C., Kurt S.M., Rimnac C.M. Notch sensitivity of PEEK in monotonic tension. Biomaterials 2009, 30:6485-6494.
8. Han C.M., Lee E.J., Kim H.E., Koh Y.H., Kim K.N., Ha Y., et al. The electron beam deposition of titanium on polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and the resulting enhanced biological properties. Biomaterials 2010, 31:3465-3470.
9. Barton A.J., Sagers R.D., Pitt W.G. Bacterial adhesion to orthopaedic implant polymers. JBiomed Mater Res 1996, 30:403-410.
10. Yu S., Hariram K.P., Kumar R., Cheang P., Aik K.K. Invitro apatite formation and its growth kinetics on hydroxyapatite/polyetheretherketone biocomposites. Biomaterials 2005, 26:2343-2352.
11. Abu Bakar M.S., Cheng M.H.W., Tang S.M., Yu S.C., Liao K., Tan C.T., et al. Tensile properties, tension-tension fatigue and biological response of polyetheretherketone-hydroxyapatite composites for load-bearing orthopedic implants. Biomaterials 2003, 24:2245-2250.
12. Wong K.L., Wong C.T., Liu W.C., Pan H.B., Fong M.K., Lam W.M., et al. Mechanical properties and invitro response of strontium-containing hydroxyapatite/polyetheretherketone composites. Biomaterials 2009, 30:3810-3817.
13. Converse G.L., Conrad T.L., Merrill C.H., Roeder R.K. Hydroxyapatite whisker-reinforced polyetherketoneketone bone ingrowth scaffolds. Acta Biomater 2010, 6:856-863.
14. Converse G.L., Yue W., Roeder R.K. Processing and tensile properties of hydroxyapatite-whisker-reinforced polyetheretherketone. Biomaterials 2007, 28:927-935.
15. Fan J.P., Tsui C.P., Tang C.Y., Chow C.L. Influence of interphase layer on the overall elasto-plastic behaviors of HA/PEEK biocomposite. Biomaterials 2004, 25:5363-5373.
16. Bobyn J.D., Stackpool G.J., Hacking S.A., Tanzer M., Krygier J.J. Characteristics of bone ingrowth and interface mechanics of a new porous tantalum biomaterial. JBone Jt Surg Br 1999, 81-B:907-914.
17. Karageorgiou V., Kaplan D. Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials 2005, 26:5474-5491.
18. Kobayashi T., Rikukawa M., Sanui K., Ogata N. Proton-conducting polymers derived from poly(ether-etherketone) and poly(4-phenoxybenzoyl-1,4-phenylene). Solid State Ionics 1998, 106:219-225.
19. Chu P.P., Wu C.S., Liu P.C., Wang T.H., Pan J.P. Proton exchange membrane bearing entangled structure: sulfonated poly (ether ether ketone)/bismaleimide hyperbranch. Polymer 2010, 51:1386-1394.
20. Hickner M.A., Ghassemi H., Kim Y.S., Einsla B.R., McGrath J.E. Alternative polymer systems for proton exchange membranes (PEMs). Chem Rev 2004, 104:4587-4612.
21. Zhao Y., Wong S.M., Wong H.M., Wu S., Hu T., Yeung K.W.K., et al. Effects of carbon and nitrogen plasma immersion ion implantation on invitro and invivo biocompatibility of titanium alloy. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 2013, 5:1510-1516.
22. Kokubo T., Kim H.M., Kawashita M. Novel bioactive materials with different mechanical properties. Biomaterials 2003, 24:2161-2175.
23. Nasaf M.M., Saidi H. Surface studies of radiation grafted sulfonic acid membranes: XPS and SEM analysis. Appl Surf Sci 2006, 252:3073-3084.
24. Pino M., Stingelin N., Tanner K.E. Nucleation and growth of apatite on NaOH-treated PEEK, HDPE and UHMWPE for artificial cornea materials. Acta Biomater 2008, 4:1827-1836.
25. Infrared spectroscopy: IR absorptions for representative functional groups 2013, Available from:. http://www.chemistry.ccsu.edu/glagovich/teaching/316/ir/table.html.
26. Doǧan H., Inan T.Y., Koral M., Kaya M. Organo-montmorillonites and sulfonated PEEK nanocomposite membranes for fuel cell applications. Appl Clay Sci 2011, 52:285-294.
27. Liu X., Wu S., Yeung K.W.K., Chan Y.L., Hu T., Xu Z., et al. Relationship between osseointegration and superelastic biomechanic in porous NiTi scaffold. Biomaterials 2011, 32:330-338.
28. Song W.H., Jun Y.K., Han Y., Hong S.H. Biomimetic apatite coatings on micro-arc oxidized titania. Biomaterials 2004, 25:3341-3349.
29. Ku Y., Chung C.P., Jang J.H. The effect of the surface modification of titanium using a recombinant fragment of fibronectin and vitronectin on cell behavior. Biomaterials 2005, 26:5153-5157.
30. Williams D.F. On the mechanisms of biocompatibility. Biomaterials 2008, 29:2941-2953.
31. Zhao Y., Wu G., Jiang J., Wong H.M., Yeung K.W.K., Chu P.K. Improved corrosion resistance and cytocompatibility of magnesium alloy by two-stage cooling in thermal treatment. Corros Sci 2012, 59:360-365.
32. Zhao L., Mei S., Chu P.K., Zhang Y., Wu Z. The influence of hierarchical hybrid micro/nano-textured titanium surface with titania nanotubes on osteoblast functions. Biomaterials 2010, 31:5072-5082.
33. Tachibana A., Kaneko S., Tanabe T., Yamauchi K. Rapid fabrication of keratin-hydroxyapatite hybrid sponges toward osteoblast cultivation and differentiation. Biomaterials 2005, 26:297-302.
34. Yamaguchi A., Komori T., Suda T. Regulation of osteoblast differentiation mediated by bone morphogenetic proteins, hedgehogs, and Cbfa1. Endocr Rev 2000, 21:393-411.
35. Khang D., Choi J., Im Y.M., Kim Y.J., Jang J.H., Kan S.S., et al. Role of subnano-, nano- and submicron-surface features on osteoblast differentiation of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells. Biomaterials 2012, 26:5998-6007.
36. Kunzler T.P., Drobek T., Schuler M., Spencer N.D. Systematic study of osteoblast and fibroblast response to roughness by means of surface-morphology gradients. Biomaterials 2007, 28:2175-2182.
37. Chu P.K., Chen J.Y., Wang L.P., Huang N. Plasma surface modification of biomaterials. Mater Sci Eng R 2002, 36:143-206.
38. Wu L., Ding J. Effects of porosity and pore size on invitro degradation of three-dimensional porous poly(D, L-lactide-co-glycolide) scaffolds for tissue engineering. JBiomed Mater Res A 2005, 75:767-777.
39. Guldberg R.E., Duvall C.L., Peister A., Oest M.E., Lin A.S.P., Palmer A.W., et al. 3D imaging of tissue integration with porous biomaterials. Biomaterials 2008, 29:3757-3761.
40. Daoust D., Devaux J., Godard P. Mechanism and kinetics of poly(ether ether ketone) (PEEK) sulfonation in concentrated sulfuric acid at room temperature. Part 1. Qualitative comparison between polymer and monomer model compound sulfonation. Polym Int 2001, 50:917-924.
41. Zaidi S.M.J., Mikhailenko S.D., Robertson G.P., Guiver M.D., Kaliaguine S. Proton conducting composite membranes from polyether ether ketone and heteropolyacids for fuel cell applications. JMemb Sci 2000, 173:17-34.
42. Wu H.L., Ma C.C.M., Li C.H., Chen C.Y. Swelling behavior and solubility parameter of sulfonated poly(ether ether ketone). JPolym Sci Part B Polym Phys 2006, 44:3128-3134.
43. Sundar S.S., Sangeetha D. Investigation on sulphonated PEEK beads for drug delivery, bioactivity and tissue engineering applications. JMater Sci 2012, 47:2736-2742.
44. Shen Y.H., Liu W.C., Wen C.Y., Pan H.B., Wang T., Darvell B.W., et al. Bone regeneration: importance of local pH-strontium-doped borosilicate scaffold. JMater Chem 2012, 22:8662-8670.
45. Witte F., Kaese V., Haferkamp H., Switzer E. Invivo corrosion of four magnesium alloys and the associated bone response. Biomaterials 2005, 26:3557-3563.
46. 3H-functionalized mesoporous Si-MCM-41 particles. JMemb Sci 2008, 316:164-175.
47. Wang H.Y., Ji J.H., Zhang W., Zhang Y.H., Jiang J., Wu Z.W., et al. Biocompatibility and bioactivity of plasma-treated biodegradable poly(butylenes succinate). Acta Biomater 2009, 5:279-287.