Wettability and pre-osteoblastic behavior evaluations of a dense bovine hydroxyapatite ceramics

Novel 8%‐TiO2‐nanoparticle‐reinforced dense polycrystalline bovine hydroxyapatite bioceramic

“…Previous studies with HA found both mechanical 6 improvement when TiO 2 nanoparticle was added and biological 5 properties comparing with pure TiO 2 and Y-TZP. Promising results on osteoblast differentiation/ F I G U R E 6 Energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) analysis of specimens' external surface.…”

“…Previous studies with HA found both mechanical 6 improvement when TiO 2 nanoparticle was added and biological 5 properties comparing with pure TiO 2 and Y‐TZP. Promising results on osteoblast differentiation/proliferation by adding TiO 2 nanoparticles into Y‐TZP matrix were also achieved 16 .…”

“…[1][2][3][4] In an attempt to produce a novel dense polycrystalline bovine HA bioceramic (DPBHA) for possible use as dental implants or dental prosthesis, this experimental material showed suitable osteoblast cell adhesion, as well as cell viability. 5 Regarding mechanical properties, DPBHA reached biaxial flexural strength (FS) about 235.2 MPa, Vickers hardness about 335 GPa, and a high Weibull modulus (m), and characteristic life (σ0). 6 Yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (Y-TZP) microstructure is similar to that of DPBHA but with higher mechanical values, ranging from 680 to 1200 MPa of FS [7][8][9][10][11][12][13] and from 3.17 to 8 MPa.m 1/2 of fracture toughness.…”

“…In an attempt to produce a novel dense polycrystalline bovine HA bioceramic (DPBHA) for possible use as dental implants or dental prosthesis, this experimental material showed suitable osteoblast cell adhesion, as well as cell viability 5 . Regarding mechanical properties, DPBHA reached biaxial flexural strength (FS) about 235.2 MPa, Vickers hardness about 335 GPa, and a high Weibull modulus ( m) , and characteristic life (σ0) 6 .…”

Comparison of the Biological Behavior and Topographical Surface Assessment of a Minimally Invasive Dental Implant and a Standard Implant: An In Vitro Study

“…According to the methods reported in the ISO 10993-5 standard [ 39 ], there are two approaches to the evaluation of the in vitro biological assessment of such implants. Some studies have assessed the effects of implants placed in direct contact with cells [ 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 ], while others have assessed the effects through material extracts collected from the biological medium (indirect contact) [ 45 ].…”