Next Article in Journal
Special Issue: Multifunctional Coatings in Orthopedic Implants
Next Article in Special Issue
Calcium Orthophosphate (CaPO4)-Based Bioceramics: Preparation, Properties, and Applications
Previous Article in Journal
Management of Teeth Affected by Molar Incisor Hypomineralization Using a Resin Infiltration Technique—A Systematic Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Impact of Graphene Oxide on Polycaprolactone PCL Surfaces: Antimicrobial Activity and Osteogenic Differentiation of Mesenchymal Stem Cell
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Advanced Biomaterials and Coatings

by
Richard Drevet
1,* and
Hicham Benhayoune
2
1
Department of Physical Electronics, Masaryk University, Kotlářská 2, CZ-61137 Brno, Czech Republic
2
Institut de Thermique, Mécanique et Matériaux (ITheMM), EA 7548, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Moulin de la Housse, BP 1039, 51687 Reims CEDEX 2, France
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Coatings 2022, 12(7), 965; https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings12070965
Submission received: 25 June 2022 / Accepted: 5 July 2022 / Published: 7 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Biomaterials and Coatings)
Everywhere on Earth, people are living longer and longer. The World Health Organization predicts that by 2050, the world’s population of 60 years or older will double to reach 2.1 billion, and the population of 80 years or older will triple to reach 426 million [1]. Due to the aging of the population, the clinical demand for biomaterials used for bone tissue repair increases every year [2,3]. Academic and industrial research is constantly developing innovative biomaterials and coatings to improve the properties and extend the lifetime of bone implants. The main metallic materials used in orthopedic or dental surgeries are made of titanium alloys [4,5,6], stainless steel [7,8], and CoCr alloys [9,10]. The mechanical properties of these alloys are suitable for bone tissue replacement, and their biocompatibility with the body environment is good. The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) defines biocompatibility as the ability of a material to be in contact with a biological system without producing an adverse effect [11]. These alloys are biocompatible, but their biological interaction with bone tissue is very low. The surface bioactivity of these implants must be improved to avoid any bone anchorage failure that would induce mandatory revision surgery. The osseointegration of bone implants can be enhanced by a surface coating of bioactive material, such as calcium phosphate or bioglass. These materials initiate the formation of a strong bond to bone tissue [12,13,14]. The bioactive coating is a scaffold to bone growth that provides a rapid biological response and improves the adhesion of the implant to bone [15,16]. Several methods can be used to produce a bioactive coating on the surface of implants. This Special Issue aims to describe the latest developments in deposition methods used to synthesize advanced biomaterials and coatings for bone implant applications. The main deposition processes are plasma spraying, magnetron sputtering, pulsed laser deposition, electrospray deposition, electrophoretic deposition, and electrodeposition.
Plasma spraying (PS) is the main industrial process due to its ability to produce large quantities of coatings with good reproducibility. Plasma spraying involves the injection of calcium phosphate or bioglass powder into a hot plasma jet whose temperature is thousands of degrees [17,18]. Inside the plasma, the grains of powder are in a molten or semi-molten state. They are accelerated toward the surface of the bone implant, where they cool down and solidify instantly to form a coating. There are some drawbacks with the high temperatures involved in plasma spraying that produce uncontrolled phase changes, chemical decompositions, and structural modifications. The physicochemical and biological properties of the coating are different from those of the initial powder [19].
Magnetron sputtering (MS) of a calcium phosphate or bioglass target is another process to produce bioactive coatings on bone implants. Magnetron sputtering is a physical vapor deposition (PVD) process. In a vacuum chamber at room temperature, high-energy ions from a plasma collide with the atoms of the target with enough energy to eject and transport them toward the surface of the substrate to form a coating [20]. Magnetron sputtering produces dense, uniform, and adherent coatings. However, the different atoms of a multicomponent target have different sputtering behaviors. The chemical composition of the deposited coating usually differs from that of the target. The experimental parameters of the process can be used to modify the stoichiometry, morphology, and structure of the bioactive coating, corresponding to different physicochemical and biological properties [21].
Pulsed laser deposition (PLD) uses a high-power laser that hits a calcium phosphate or bioglass target inside a vacuum chamber [22]. The laser–matter interaction induces the ablation of the target and generates a plasma plume containing ejected atoms, ions, and electrons. The plasma plume is directed toward the surface of the substrate where the material is collected and condensed to form a coating. The process rapidly produces uniform and adherent thin coatings [23]. As described for magnetron sputtering, the stoichiometry of the coating may differ from that of the target, resulting in variations in the physicochemical and biological properties of the coating.
Electrospray deposition (ESD) uses an aerosol that contains calcium phosphate particles, bioglass particles, or precursors of these materials. The aerosol is produced by injecting a solution through a nozzle connected to high voltage [24]. Charged droplets are produced at the tip of the nozzle, and they are directed toward a grounded and heated substrate. The droplets lose their surface charge, and the solvent is evaporated to produce the bioactive coating. The process produces uniform coatings with different morphologies as a function of the experimental parameters [25].
Electrophoretic deposition (EPD) requires two conductive electrodes connected to a generator and immersed in a stable colloidal suspension of calcium phosphate or bioglass powder. In contact with the solution, the colloidal particles carry a positive or negative electrostatic charge on their surface [26]. They move through the liquid under the influence of the electric field between the two electrodes. They agglomerate on one electrode surface to form a bioactive coating. Post-deposition thermal annealing in a furnace is necessary to evaporate the solvent and improve the cohesive and adhesive properties of the coating [27].
Electrodeposition (ELD) is a low-temperature process that requires two metallic electrodes connected to a generator and immersed in an aqueous solution containing calcium ions and phosphate ions. In academic research, a reference electrode is also usually connected in a three-electrode setup that provides electrochemical measurements. In the electrolytic cell, the anode is the positive electrode, and the cathode is the negative electrode. Electrical energy from the generator is used to trigger a series of chemical reactions at the electrode–electrolyte interfaces. At the cathode, where the bone implant is connected, the main electrochemical reaction is the reduction of water, the solvent of the electrolyte solution. This reaction results in a local pH variation in the vicinity of the cathode that induces surface precipitation of the calcium phosphate coating [28]. As a function of the experimental parameters, various chemical compositions, phases, and morphologies are obtained. Direct current was typically used first, but pulsed current electrodeposition became more interesting in recent years [29]. Since the process takes place in an aqueous medium at room temperature, ionic additives (Na+, Ag+, F, Co2+, Cu2+, Mg2+, Sr2+, Zn2+, etc.) or organic components (polymers, proteins, drugs, etc.) can be added to enhance the biological and mechanical properties of the calcium phosphate coating [30]. Post-deposition annealing is also required to evaporate the solvent and improve the cohesive and adhesive properties of the electrodeposited coating [31].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.D. and H.B.; validation, R.D. and H.B.; resources, R.D. and H.B.; writing—original draft preparation, R.D. and H.B.; writing—review and editing, R.D. and H.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health (accessed on 23 June 2022).
  2. Gheno, R.; Cepparo, J.M.; Rosca, C.E.; Cotton, A. Musculoskeletal Disorders in the Elderly. J. Clin. Imaging Sci. 2012, 2, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Li, G.; Thabane, L.; Papaioannou, A.; Ioannidis, G.; Levine, M.A.H.; Adachi, J.D. An overview of osteoporosis and frailty in the elderly. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 2017, 18, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Geetha, M.; Singh, A.K.; Asokamani, R.; Gogia, A.K. Ti based biomaterials, the ultimate choice for orthopaedic implants—A review. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2009, 54, 397–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ijaz, M.F.; Laillé, D.; Héraud, L.; Gordin, D.M.; Castany, P.; Gloriant, T. Design of a novel superelastic Ti-23Hf-3Mo-4Sn biomedical alloy combining low modulus, high strength and large recovery strain. Mater. Lett. 2016, 177, 39–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. He, G.; Hagiwara, M. Ti alloy design strategy for biomedical applications. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2006, 26, 14–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Chen, Q.; Thouas, G.A. Metallic implant biomaterials. Mater. Sci. Eng. R 2015, 87, 1–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Prokoshkin, S.; Pustov, Y.; Zhukova, Y.; Kadirov, P.; Dubinskiy, S.; Sheremetyev, V.; Karavaeva, M. Effect of Thermomechanical Treatment on Functional Properties of Biodegradable Fe-30Mn-5Si Shape Memory Alloy. Metall. Mater. Trans. A 2021, 52, 2024–2032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Tchana Nkonta, D.V.; Drevet, R.; Fauré, J.; Benhayoune, H. Effect of surface mechanical attrition treatment on the microstructure of cobalt–chromium–molybdenum biomedical alloy. Microsc. Res. Technol. 2021, 84, 238–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. AlMangour, B.; Luqman, M.; Grzesiak, D.; Al-Harbi, H.; Ijaz, F. Effect of processing parameters on the microstructure and mechanical properties of Co–Cr–Mo alloy fabricated by selective laser melting. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2020, 792, 139456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Williams, D.F. On the mechanisms of biocompatibility. Biomaterials 2008, 29, 2941–2953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Paital, S.R.; Dahotre, N.B. Calcium phosphate coatings for bio-implant applications: Materials, performance factors, and methodologies. Mater. Sci. Eng. R 2009, 66, 1–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Hench, L. The story of Bioglass®. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 2006, 17, 967–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Sergi, R.; Bellucci, D.; Cannillo, V. A Comprehensive Review of Bioactive Glass Coatings: State of the Art, Challenges and Future Perspectives. Coatings 2020, 10, 757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Williams, D.F. On the nature of biomaterials. Biomaterials 2009, 30, 5897–5909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Dorozhkin, S.V. Calcium orthophosphate deposits: Preparation, properties and biomedical applications. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2015, 55, 272–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Heimann, R.B. Thermal spraying of biomaterials. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2006, 201, 2012–2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Cañas, E.; Orts, M.J.; Boccaccini, A.R.; Sánchez, E. Microstructural and in vitro characterization of 45S5 bioactive glass coatings deposited by solution precursor plasma spraying (SPPS). Surf. Coat. Technol. 2019, 371, 151–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Heimann, R.B. Structural Changes of Hydroxylapatite during Plasma Spraying: Raman and NMR Spectroscopy Results. Coatings 2021, 11, 987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Surmenev, R.A.; Ivanova, A.A.; Epple, M.; Pichugin, V.F.; Surmeneva, M.A. Physical principles of radio-frequency magnetron sputter deposition of calcium-phosphate-based coating with tailored properties. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2021, 413, 127098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Berbecaru, C.; Stan, G.E.; Pina, S.; Tulyaganov, D.U.; Ferreira, J.M.F. The bioactivity mechanism of magnetron sputtered bioglass thin films. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2012, 258, 9840–9848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Koch, C.F.; Johnson, S.; Kumar, D.; Jelinek, M.; Chrisey, D.B.; Doraiswamy, A.; Jin, C.; Narayan, R.J.; Mihailescu, I.N. Pulsed laser deposition of hydroxyapatite thin films. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2007, 27, 484–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. D’Alessio, L.; Teghil, R.; Zaccagnino, M.; Zaccardo, I.; Ferro, D.; Marotta, V. Pulsed laser ablation and deposition of bioactive glass as coating material for biomedical applications. Appl. Surf. Sci. 1999, 138–139, 527–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Leeuwenburgh, S.; Wolke, J.; Schoonman, J.; Jansen, J. Electrostatic spray deposition (ESD) of calcium phosphate coatings. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 2003, 66, 330–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Müller, V.; Jobbagy, M.; Djurado, E. Coupling sol-gel with electrospray deposition: Towards nanotextured bioactive glass coatings. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 2021, 41, 7288–7300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Bartmański, M.; Pawłowski, Ł.; Strugała, G.; Mielewczyk-Gryń, A.; Zieliński, A. Properties of nanohydroxyapatite coatings doped with nanocopper, obtained by electrophoretic deposition on Ti13Zr13Nb alloy. Materials 2019, 12, 3741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Azzouz, I.; Faure, J.; Khlifi, K.; Cheikh Larbi, A.; Benhayoune, H. Electrophoretic Deposition of 45S5 Bioglass® Coatings on the Ti6Al4V Prosthetic Alloy with Improved Mechanical Properties. Coatings 2020, 10, 1192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Furko, M.; Balázsi, C. Calcium phosphate based bioactive ceramic layers on implant materials preparation, properties, and biological performance. Coatings 2020, 10, 823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Drevet, R.; Benhayoune, H. Electrodeposition of Calcium Phosphate Coatings on Metallic Substrates for Bone Implant Applications: A Review. Coatings 2022, 12, 539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Drevet, R.; Zhukova, Y.; Dubinskiy, S.; Kazakbiev, A.; Naumenko, V.; Abakumov, M.; Fauré, J.; Benhayoune, H.; Prokoshkin, S. Electrodeposition of cobalt-substituted calcium phosphate coatings on Ti22Nb6Zr alloy for bone implant applications. J. Alloy. Compd. 2019, 793, 576–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Drevet, R.; Fauré, J.; Benhayoune, H. Structural and morphological study of electrodeposited calcium phosphate materials submitted to thermal treatment. Mater. Lett. 2017, 209, 27–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Drevet, R.; Benhayoune, H. Advanced Biomaterials and Coatings. Coatings 2022, 12, 965. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings12070965

AMA Style

Drevet R, Benhayoune H. Advanced Biomaterials and Coatings. Coatings. 2022; 12(7):965. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings12070965

Chicago/Turabian Style

Drevet, Richard, and Hicham Benhayoune. 2022. "Advanced Biomaterials and Coatings" Coatings 12, no. 7: 965. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings12070965

APA Style

Drevet, R., & Benhayoune, H. (2022). Advanced Biomaterials and Coatings. Coatings, 12(7), 965. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings12070965

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop