Surface Characteristics of Bioactive Glass-Infiltrated Zirconia with Different Hydrofluoric Acid Etching Conditions

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the surface characteristics of bioactive glass-infiltrated zirconia specimens that underwent different hydrofluoric acid (HF) etching conditions. Specimens were classified into the following six groups: Zirconia, Zirliner, Porcelain, Bioactive glass A1, Bioactive glass A2, and Bioactive glass A3. Zirliner and porcelain were applied to fully sintered zirconia followed by heat treatment. Bioactive glass was infiltrated into presintered zirconia using a spin coating method followed by complete sintering. All the specimens were acid-etched with 10% or 20% HF, and surface roughness was measured using a profiler. The surface roughness of the zirconia group was not affected by the etching time or the concentration of the acid. The roughness of the three bioactive glass groups (A1, A2, and A3) was slightly increased up until 10 minutes of etching. After 1 hour of etching, the roughness was considerably increased. The infiltrated bioactive glass and acid etching did not affect the adhesion and proliferation of osteoblasts. This study confirmed that surface roughness was affected by the infiltration material, etching time, and acid concentration. For implant surfaces, it is expected that the use of etched bioactive glass-infiltrated zirconia with micro-topographies will be similar to that of machined or sand-blasted/acid-etched (SLA) titanium.

Zirconia surface modifications for implant dentistry

“…Oh et al 2017tested HF in two different concentrations (10% and 20%) and in different time points (1, 2, 10, and 60 min) in pure zirconia, porcelain, and in bioactive glass that was infiltrated into pre-sintered zirconia. The roughness of zirconia was not affected by the etching time or the concentration of the acid although etched bioactive glass-infiltrated zirconia revealed similar surface topographic aspect when compared to grit blasted/acid-etched titanium [61].…”

“…Bioactive coatings on zirconia have demonstrated advantages for bioactivity, since they have the ability to induce hydroxyapatite formation in a biological environment, which is essential for subsequent bone proliferation. In literature, different coating materials with favorable biologic properties have been described, such as: silica, magnesium, nitrogen, carbon, calcium phosphate, hydroxyapatite, dopamine, and graphene [26,37,61,[81][82][83][84][85].…”

Development and evaluation of an IgY based silica matrix immunoassay platform for rapid onsite SEB detection

“…The incubation period for successive matrix functionalization steps were HF (30 min), ammonia wash (20–30 s), APTES (1 h) 7 and GA (30 min) 2 and carried out at room temperature. 36 …”

“…The incubation period for successive matrix functionalization steps were HF (30 min), ammonia wash (20-30 s), APTES (1 h) 7 and GA (30 min) 2 and carried out at room temperature. 36 2.4 Characterization of immunoassay matrix 2.4.1 Scanning electron microscopy. The immunoassay matrix developed on silica substrate was analyzed to observe the change in surface morphology at various points of chemical modications.…”

Role and Mechanism of a Micro-/Nano-Structured Porous Zirconia Surface in Regulating the Biological Behavior of Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells

“…Surface microtopography has been demonstrated to predominantly influence implant osseointegration. Recent studies have explored ways to modify zirconia implant surfaces for better osseointegration, including acid etching, sandblasting, laser treatment, ultraviolet light, and coatings. ,− Although sandblasting and acid etching is the most common zirconia surface treatment, , it is difficult to obtain a multiscale gradient porous surface similar to the well-established sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched surfaces of titanium implants. Additionally, compared to bone tissue, zirconia has a much higher elastic modulus.…”