Comparative study on physicochemical properties of macroporous hydroxyapatite coatings on 316L stainless steel implants using sol-gel and inverse opal templating
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online January, 2025
Comparative study on physicochemical properties of macroporous hydroxyapatite coatings on 316L stainless steel implants using sol-gel and inverse opal templating
This study focuses on enhancing metallic implant biocompatibility by fabricating a three-dimensional ordered macroporous hydroxyapatite (HAP) architecture through inverse opal technology. Utilizing colloidal crystal templates on 316L stainless steel, specifically with polystyrene and polymethyl methacrylate, successful fabrication was achieved through H2O2 plus H2SO4 etching. The calcination process at different temperatures (350, 500 and 700°C) resulted in distinct HAP structures, and the sample was calcined at 500°C (HAP500), exhibiting superior physicochemical properties, including enhanced crystallinity, surface roughness and wettability. Biological experiments demonstrated that HAP500 significantly promoted mesenchymal stem cell adhesion and proliferation compared to HAP350 and bare 316LSS, suggesting its potential as a highly effective medical device for bone implantation.
Ong KL, Yun BM and White JB. New biomaterials for orthopedic implants. Orthop Res Rev 2015; 7: 107–130.
2.
BekmurzayevaADuncansonWJAzevedoHS,et al.Surface modification of stainless steel for biomedical applications: revisiting a century-old material. Mater Sci Eng C2018; 93: 1073–1089.
3.
FadliAPrabowoAReni YentiS, et al.High performance of coating hydroxyapatite layer on 316L stainless steel using ultrasonically and alkaline pretreatment. J King Saud Univ Sci2023; 35: 102681.
4.
UribeRUvillúsAFernándezL, et al.Electrochemical deposition of hydroxyapatite on stainless steel coated with tantalum/tantalum nitride using simulated body fluid as an electrolytic medium. Coatings2022; 12: 440.
5.
TufanYDemirECEfeM,et al.Efficient fabrication of ultrafine-grained 316L stainless steel surfaces for orthopaedic applications. Mater Sci Technol2019; 35: 1891–1897.
6.
ShenYFGuDDWuP. Development of porous 316L stainless steel with controllable microcellular features using selective laser melting. Mater Sci Technol2008; 24: 1501–1505.
7.
XiaoYZhaoLShiY, et al.Surface modification of 316L stainless steel by grafting methoxy poly(ethylene glycol) to improve the biocompatibility. Chem Res Chinese Univ2015; 31: 651–657.
8.
YuanSYinJJiangW, et al.Enhancing antibacterial activity of surface-grafted chitosan with immobilized lysozyme on bioinspired stainless steel substrates. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces2013; 106: 11–21.
9.
MedilanskiEKaufmannKWickLY, et al.Influence of the surface topography of stainless steel on bacterial adhesion. Biofouling2010; 18: 193–203.
10.
KravanjaKAFinšgarM. A review of techniques for the application of bioactive coatings on metal-based implants to achieve controlled release of active ingredients. Mater Des2022; 217: 110653.
11.
AnghelinaFVUngureanuDNBratuV, et al.Fine structure analysis of biocompatible ceramic materials based hydroxyapatite and metallic biomaterials 316L. Appl Surf Sci2013; 285: 65–71.
12.
TulinskiMJurczykM. Nanostructured nickel-free austenitic stainless steel composites with different content of hydroxyapatite. Appl Surf Sci2012; 260: 80–83.
13.
SogoYItoAFukasawaK, et al.Zinc containing hydroxyapatite ceramics to promote osteoblastic cell activity. Mater Sci Technol2004; 20: 1079–1083.
14.
JaafarAHeckerCÁrkiP,et al.Sol-gel derived hydroxyapatite coatings for titanium implants: a review. Bioeng2020; 7: 127.
15.
JalaliFOveisiHMeshkiniA. Enhanced osteogenesis properties of titanium implant materials by highly uniform mesoporous thin films of hydroxyapatite and titania intermediate layer. J Mater Sci Mater Med2020; 31: 1–15.
16.
SalahinejadEHadianfardMJMacdonaldDD, et al.A new double-layer sol–gel coating to improve the corrosion resistance of a medical-grade stainless steel in a simulated body fluid. Mater Lett2013; 97: 162–165.
17.
SharafipourMOveisiHMeshkiniA. Meso-macroporous crack-free nanohydroxyapatite coatings templated by C12 E10 diblock copolymer on Ti6Al4 V implant materials toward human osteoblast-like cells. J Biomed Mater Res A2020; 108: 882–894.
18.
MaksoudFJVelázquez de la PazMFHannAJ, et al.Porous biomaterials for tissue engineering: a review. J Mater Chem B2022; 10: 8111–8165.
19.
ZhangYSZhuCXiaY. Inverse opal scaffolds and their biomedical applications. Adv Mater2017; 29: 1701115.
20.
HouQGrijpmaDWFeijenJ. Porous polymeric structures for tissue engineering prepared by a coagulation, compression moulding and salt leaching technique. Biomaterials2003; 24: 1937–1947.
WeblerGDRodriguesWCSilvaAES, et al.Use of micrometric latex beads to improve the porosity of hydroxyapatite obtained by chemical coprecipitation method. Appl Surf Sci2018; 436: 141–151.
23.
BayatFAhmadian KordashtSAmani-GhadimAR,et al.Structural, morphological, and optical analysis of TiO2 inverse opals prepared under different synthesis conditions. Mater Chem Phys2023; 299: 127514.
24.
TemerovFAnkudzeBSaarinenJJ. TiO2 inverse opal structures with facile decoration of precious metal nanoparticles for enhanced photocatalytic activity. Mater Chem Phys2020; 242: 122471.
25.
JinYZhuYYangX, et al.Fabrication and characterization of cerium-doped titania inverse opal by sol–gel method. Mater Chem Phys2007; 106: 209–214.
26.
WangLZhouMYfeng WangX, et al.Preparation of inverse opal hydroxyapatite and drug delivery properties. ChemistrySelect2020; 5: 3815–3819.
27.
OsathanonTLinnesMLRajacharRM, et al.Microporous nanofibrous fibrin-based scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials2008; 29: 4091–4099.
28.
ZhangYSReganKPXiaY. Controlling the pore sizes and related properties of inverse opal scaffolds for tissue engineering applications. Macromol Rapid Commun2013; 34: 485–491.
29.
WangHWangLMengS, et al.Nanocomposite of graphene oxide encapsulated in polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA): pre-modification, synthesis, and latex stability. J Compos Sci2020; 4: 118.
30.
MurshidNCathcartNKitaevV. Room-temperature synthesis of size-uniform polystyrene latex and characterization of its properties: third-year undergraduate teaching lab. J Chem Educ2019; 96: 1479–1485.
31.
LiuDMTroczynskiTTsengWJ. Water-based sol–gel synthesis of hydroxyapatite: process development. Biomaterials2001; 22: 1721–1730.
32.
FatemiMMeshkiniAMatinMM. A dual catalytic functionalized hollow mesoporous silica-based nanocarrier coated with bacteria-derived exopolysaccharides for targeted delivery of irinotecan to colorectal cancer cells. Int J Biol Macromol2024; 259: 129179.
33.
SistanipourEMeshkiniAOveisiH. Catechin-conjugated mesoporous hydroxyapatite nanoparticle: a novel nano-antioxidant with enhanced osteogenic property. Colloids Surfaces B Biointerfaces2018; 169: 329–339.
34.
IshikawaKMiyamotoYTsuchiyaA, et al.Physical and histological comparison of hydroxyapatite, carbonate apatite, and β-tricalcium phosphate bone substitutes. Materials2018; 11: 1993.
35.
Von RecumAFShannonCECannonCE, et al.Surface roughness, porosity, and texture as modifiers of cellular adhesion. Tissue Eng2007; 2: 241–253. https://doi.org/10.1089/TEN.1996.2.241
36.
BoyanBDSylviaVLLiuY, et al.Surface roughness mediates its effects on osteoblasts via protein kinase A and phospholipase A2. Biomaterials1999; 20: 2305–2310.
37.
PonsonnetLReybierKJaffrezicN, et al.Relationship between surface properties (roughness, wettability) of titanium and titanium alloys and cell behaviour. Mater Sci Eng C2003; 23: 551–560.
38.
BeaudoinJJMarchandJ. Pore structure. In: RamachandranVSJamesJB (eds) Handbook of analytical techniques in concrete science and technology. Norwich, NY: William Andrew Publishing, 2001, pp. 528–628. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-081551437-4.50017-5
39.
WangXZhangQ. Role of surface roughness in the wettability, surface energy and flotation kinetics of calcite. Powder Technol2020; 371: 55–63.
40.
HarunWSWAsriRIMAliasJ, et al.A comprehensive review of hydroxyapatite-based coatings adhesion on metallic biomaterials. Ceram Int2018; 44: 1250–1268.
41.
LiuQDingJManteFK, et al.The role of surface functional groups in calcium phosphate nucleation on titanium foil: a self-assembled monolayer technique. Biomaterials2002; 23: 3103–3111.
42.
MeyerUBüchterAWiesmannHP, et al.Basic reactions of osteoblasts on structured material surfaces. Eur Cell Mater2005; 9: 39–49.
43.
Frias MartinezMADe Fátima BalderramaÍBrandãoPS, et al.Surface roughness of titanium disks influences the adhesion, proliferation and differentiation of osteogenic properties derived from human. Int J Implant Dent2020; 61: 46. https://doi.org/10.1186/S40729-020-00243-5
44.
WongPCSongSMTsaiPH, et al.Relationship between the surface roughness of biodegradable Mg-based bulk metallic glass and the osteogenetic ability of MG63 osteoblast-like cells. Mater2020; 13: 1188.
45.
KravchenkoYOGarkushaIETaranAV, et al.Development of hydrophilic NbCuSi(N) & TiAlNb(N) coatings as a new strategy for medical implants modification. Ceram Int2023; 49: 4099–4108.
46.
KieswetterBDBKSchwartzZHummertTW, et al.Surface roughness modulates the local production of growth factors and cytokines by osteoblast-like MG-63 cells. J Biomed Mater Res1996; 32: 55–63.
47.
HannaHMirLMAndreFM. In vitro osteoblastic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells generates cell layers with distinct properties. Stem Cell Res Ther2018; 9: 1–11.
48.
ArcosDVallet-RegíM. Substituted hydroxyapatite coatings of bone implants. J Mater Chem B2020; 8: 1781–1800.
49.
StichTAlagbosoFKřenekT, et al.Implant-bone-interface: reviewing the impact of titanium surface modifications on osteogenic processes in vitro and in vivo. Bioeng Transl Med2022; 7: e10239.
