Page 570 - IJB-9-6
P. 570

International Journal of Bioprinting                           Osteogenic, antibacterial CpTi-MgOCu implants




            CpTi matrix, which is used as a coating on Ti6Al4V,   Consent for publication
            to strengthen the Ti-on-Ti interface so as to prevent
            delamination failure. The  in  vivo studies demonstrated   Not applicable.
            superior osteogenic performance of CpTi-MgO and CpTi-  Availability of data
            MgO-Cu compositions. Histomorphometric evaluations
            reveal 4× enhanced mineralized bone formation in CpTi-  All raw data for this study has been presented in this
            MgO (49.5 ± 11.5%) and 3.5× in CpTi-MgO-Cu (38.2 ±   manuscript.
            7.2%) in comparison to CpTi (12.1 ± 9.2%) at the bone–
            implant interface. Additionally, 3 wt.% Cu addition did   References
            not result in cytotoxicity. Antibacterial studies using the
            commonly occurring S. aureus strain revealed that the Cu   1.   Liu X, Chu PK, Ding C, 2004, Surface modification
            in CpTi-MgO-Cu composition had a bactericidal effect of   of titanium, titanium alloys, and related materials for
            81% at the end of 72 h timepoint. Therefore, CpTi-MgO-  biomedical applications. Mater Sci Eng R Rep, 47(3): 49–121.
            Cu composition can be utilized as a multifaceted metal-  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mser.2004.11.001
            ceramic coating on the bulk Ti6Al4V, which can serve as   2.   Niinomi M, 2007, Recent research and development in
            an ideal material for orthopedic implant applications to   metallic materials for biomedical, dental and healthcare
            reduce implant failures and obviate the need for revision   products applications. Mater Sci Forum, 539: 193–200.
            surgeries due to delayed early-stage osseointegration and
            infection-related issues.                             https://doi.org/10.4028/0-87849-428-6.193
                                                               3.   Van Noort R, 1987, Titanium: The implant material of today.
            Acknowledgments                                       J Mater Sci, 22(11): 3801–3811.

            The authors would like to acknowledge the experimental   https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01133326
            support from Dr. Indranath Mitra, Mr. Aruntapan Dash,   4.   Dong YP, Tang JC, Wang DW,  et al., 2020, Additive
            and Ms. Aditi Dahiya of Washington State University   manufacturing of pure Ti with superior mechanical
            (WSU).                                                performance, low cost, and biocompatibility for potential
                                                                  replacement of Ti-6Al-4V. Mater Des, 196(2020): 109142.
            Funding                                               https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109142
            The research results reported in this publication were   5.   Feng J, Wei D, Zhang P, et al., 2013, Preparation of TiNbTaZrMo
            supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and   high-entropy alloy with tunable Young’s modulus by selective
            Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases of the National     laser melting. J Manuf Process, 85(2023): 160–165.
            Institutes of Health under Award Numbers R01 AR067306   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2022.11.046
            and R01 AR078241. The content is solely the responsibility
            of the authors and does not necessarily represent the   6.   Cui Y-W, Chen L-Y, Chu Y-H, et al., 2023, Metastable pitting
            official views of the National Institutes of Health.  corrosion behavior and characteristics of passive film of laser
                                                                  powder bed fusion produced Ti–6Al–4V in NaCl solutions
            Conflict of interest                                  with different concentrations. Corros Sci, 126(2022): 111017.
                                                                  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2023.111017
            The authors declare no conflict of interest.
                                                               7.   Ciliveri S, Bandyopadhyay A, 2021, Influence of strut-size
            Author contributions                                  and cell-size variations on porous Ti6Al4V coated structures
                                                                  for load-bearing implants.  J Mech Behav Biomed Mater,
            Conceptualization: Amit Bandyopadhyay                 105023.
            Formal analysis: Sushant Ciliveri, Amit Bandyopadhyay  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2021.105023
            Investigation: Sushant Ciliveri
            Methodology: Sushant Ciliveri, Amit Bandyopadhyay  8.   Ke D, Robertson SF, Dernell WS, et al., 2017, Effects of MgO
            Writing – original draft: Sushant Ciliveri            and SiO2 on plasma-sprayed hydroxyapatite coating: An
            Writing – review & editing: Amit Bandyopadhyay        in vivo study in rat distal femoral defects. ACS Appl Mater
                                                                  Interfaces, 9(31): 25731–25737.
            Ethics approval and consent to participate            https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.7b05574
            All animal studies have been conducted after receiving   9.   Bandyopadhyay A, Bernard S, Xue W, et al., 2006, Calcium
            necessary approval from the Institutional Animal Care and   phosphate-based resorbable ceramics: Influence of MgO,
            Use Committee (IACUC) of Washington State University   ZnO, and SiO2 dopants. J Am Ceram Soc, 89(9): 2675–2688.
            (WSU) under the protocol number ASAF #6816.           https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-2916.2006.01207.x

            Volume 9 Issue 6 (2023)                        562                          https://doi.org/10.36922/ijb.1167
   565   566   567   568   569   570   571   572   573   574   575