Advertisement

Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 54, Issue 5, pp 4259–4276 | Cite as

Improved wear, mechanical, and biological behavior of UHMWPE-HAp-zirconia hybrid nanocomposites with a prospective application in total hip joint replacement

  • Meysam Salari
  • Sara Mohseni Taromsari
  • Reza Bagheri
  • Mohammad Ali Faghihi Sani
Materials for life sciences

Abstract

Medical engineering advances in total joint replacements and societies’ rising demand for long-lasting materials have proven it essential to manufacture materials that are more similar to the original tissue in the fields of mechanical, tribological, and biological properties. Ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) is a polymer widely used in arthroplasty applications due to its biocompatibility, chemical stability, and reasonable mechanical properties; however, it still fails to entirely meet the standards of the hip joint implant. In this study, different concentrations of nanosized zirconia were added to UHMWPE and HAp matrix with an intended application in arthroplasty. Liquid-phase ultrasonication and hot pressing were employed to disperse the reinforcing phases and to form the final standard samples, respectively. Tensile, Vickers hardness, and pin-on-disk tests were carried out to evaluate mechanical and wear properties of the samples. In the meanwhile, in vitro biological properties were studied via MTT assay, alkaline phosphatase enzyme activity, and cell morphology tests. Dispersion features, microstructural structures, and cell adhesion were also assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Results indicate improvement in both tensile and wear properties by zirconia addition; for instance, the sample containing 10 wt% zirconia and 10 wt% HAp exhibits 45% increase in yield strength and 64% reduction in coefficient of friction. On the other hand, biological properties have also significantly improved with zirconia incorporation, at which all samples proved to be biocompatible with an increase in both osteoblasts activity and cell adhesion with increasing zirconia concentration.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The first two authors have worked on the project at Polymeric Materials Research Group (PMRG) at the Department of Materials Science and Engineering of Sharif University of Technology. The project was supervised by Dr. Reza Bagheri and Dr. Mohammad Ali Faghihi Sani, professors at the same department. The authors certify that they have NO affiliations with or involvement in any other institute, organization or entity with any financial interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Davis J (2003) Handbook of materials for medical devices. ASM Int. pp 205–216.  https://doi.org/10.1361/hmmd2003p001
  2. 2.
    Shin H, Jo S, Mikos AG (2003) Biomimetic materials for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 24:4353–4364.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00339-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Agrawal CM (1998) Reconstructing the human body using biomaterials. JOM J Miner Met Mater Soc 50:31–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Katti KS (2004) Biomaterials in total joint replacement. Colloids Surf B: Biointerfaces 39:133–142.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2003.12.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Modjarrad K, Ebnesajjad S (2014) Handbook of polymer applications in medicine and medical devicesGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kurtz SM (2009) UHMWPE biomaterials handbook: ultra high molecular weight polyethylene in total joint replacement and medical devices. Academic Press, Cambridge, MA, USGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ingham E, Fisher J (2000) Biological reactions to wear debris in total joint replacement. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part H J Eng Med 214:21–37.  https://doi.org/10.1243/0954411001535219 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lahiri D, Dua R, Zhang C, De Socarraz-Novoa I, Bhat A, Ramaswamy S, Agarwal A (2012) Graphene nanoplatelet-induced strengthening of ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene and biocompatibility in vitro. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 4:2234–2241.  https://doi.org/10.1021/am300244s CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brach del Prever EM, Bistolfi A, Bracco P, Costa L (2009) UHMWPE for arthroplasty: Past or future? J Orthop Traumatol 10:1–8.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10195-008-0038-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kurtz SM, Hozack W, Turner J, Purtill J, MacDonald D, Sharkey P, Parvizi J, Manley M, Rothman R (2005) Mechanical properties of retrieved highly cross-linked crossfire liners after short-term implantation. J Arthroplasty 20:840–849.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2005.07.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mirsalehi SA, Sattari M, Khavandi A, Mirdamadi S, Naimi-Jamal MR (2015) Tensile and biocompatibility properties of synthesized nano-hydroxyapatite reinforced ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene nanocomposite. J Compos Mater 177:17–20.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2016.04.072 Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fang L, Leng Y, Gao P (2006) Processing and mechanical properties of HA/UHMWPE nanocomposites. Biomaterials 27:3701–3707.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.02.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Park HJ, Kwak SY, Kwak S (2005) Wear-resistant ultra high molecular weight polyethylene/zirconia composites prepared by in situ ziegler-natta polymerization. Macromol Chem Phys 206:945–950.  https://doi.org/10.1002/macp.200400350 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guofang G, Huayong Y, Xin F (2004) Tribological properties of kaolin filled UHMWPE composites in unlubricated sliding. Wear 256:88–94.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1648(03)00394-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Macuvele DLP, Nones J, Matsinhe JV, Lima MM, Soares C, Fiori MA, Riella HG (2017) Advances in ultra high molecular weight polyethylene/hydroxyapatite composites for biomedical applications: a brief review. Mater Sci Eng C 76:1248–1262.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2017.02.070 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hisbergues M, Vendeville S, Vendeville P (2009) Review zirconia: established facts and perspectives for a biomaterial in dental implantology. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater 88:519–529.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.31147 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tai Z, Chen Y, An Y, Yan X, Xue Q (2012) Tribological behavior of UHMWPE reinforced with graphene oxide nanosheets. Tribol Lett 46:55–63.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11249-012-9919-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Visco A, Yousef S, Galtieri G, Nocita D, Pistone A, Njuguna J (2016) Thermal mechanical and rheological behaviors of nanocomposites based on UHMWPE/paraffin oil/carbon nanofiller obtained by using different dispersion techniques. JOM 68:1078–1089.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-016-1845-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Feng W, Mu-sen L, Yu-peng L, Yong-xin Q (2005) A simple sol–gel technique for preparing hydroxyapatite nanopowders. Mater Lett 59:916–919.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2004.08.041 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Maksimkin AV, Kaloshkin SD, Kaloshkina MS, Gorshenkov MV, Tcherdyntsev VV, Ergin KS, Shchetinin IV (2012) Ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene reinforced with multi-walled carbon nanotubes: fabrication method and properties. J Alloys Compd 536:S538–S540.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2012.01.151 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kang X, Zhang W, Yang C (2016) Mechanical properties study of micro- and nano-hydroxyapatite reinforced ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene composites. J Appl Polym Sci 133:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1002/app.42869 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chen Y, Qi Y, Tai Z, Yan X, Zhu F, Xue Q (2012) Preparation, mechanical properties and biocompatibility of graphene oxide/ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene composites. Eur Polym J 48:1026–1033.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2012.03.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Liu J-L, Zhu Y-Y, Wang Q-L, Ge S-R (2008) Biotribological behavior of ultra high molecular weight polyethylene composites containing bovine bone hydroxyapatite. J China Univ Min Technol 18:606–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Patel AK, Trivedi P, Balani K (2016) Carbon nanotube functionalization decreases osteogenic differentiation in aluminum oxide reinforced ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 2:1242–1256.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b00154 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ruan SL, Gao P, Yang XG, Yu TX (2003) Toughening high performance ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene using multiwalled carbon nanotubes. Polymer 44:5643–5654.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-3861(03)00628-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ge S, Wang S, Huang X (2009) Increasing the wear resistance of UHMWPE acetabular cups by adding natural biocompatible particles. Wear 267:770–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bodhak S, Nath S, Basu B (2009) Friction and wear properties of novel HDPE–HAp–Al2O3 biocomposites against alumina counterface. J Biomater Appl 23:407–433.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0885328208090012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gupta A, Tripathi G, Lahiri D, Balani K (2013) Compression molded ultra high molecular weight polyethylene-hydroxyapatite-aluminum oxide-carbon nanotube hybrid composites forhard tissue replacement. J Mater Sci Technol 29:514–522.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2013.03.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Puértolas JA, Kurtz SM (2014) Evaluation of carbon nanotubes and graphene as reinforcements for UHMWPE-based composites in arthroplastic applications: a review. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 39:129–145.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2014.06.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mirsalehi SA, Khavandi A, Mirdamadi S, Naimi-Jamal MR, Kalantari SM (2015) Nanomechanical and tribological behavior of hydroxyapatite reinforced ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene nanocomposites for biomedical applications. J Appl Polym Sci 132:1–11.  https://doi.org/10.1002/app.42052 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Xiong DS, Lin JM, Fan DL (2006) Wear properties of nano-Al2O3/UHMWPE composites irradiated by gamma ray against a CoCrMo alloy. Biomed Mater 1:175–179.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-6041/1/3/013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chang BP, Akil HM, Nasir RM (2013) Mechanical and tribological properties of zeolite-reinforced UHMWPE composite for implant application. Procedia Eng 68:88–94.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2013.12.152 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Liu T, Eyler A, Zhong WH (2016) Simultaneous improvements in wear resistance and mechanical properties of UHMWPE nanocomposite fabricated via a facile approach. Mater Lett 177:17–20.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2016.04.072 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Farrar DF, Brain A (1997) The microstructure of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene used in total joint replacements. Biomaterials 18:1677–1685.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(97)00143-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wang YQ, Li J (1999) Sliding wear behavior and mechanism of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene. Mater Sci Eng A 266:155–160.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-5093(99)00040-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bahrami H, Ramazani SA, Shafiee M, Kheradmand A (2016) Preparation and investigation of tribological properties of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE)/graphene oxide. Polym Adv Technol 27:1172–1178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chih A, Ansón-Casaos A, Puértolas JA (2017) Frictional and mechanical behavior of graphene/UHMWPE composite coatings. Tribol Int 116:295–302.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2017.07.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Granchi D, Ciapetti G, Amato I, Pagani S, Cenni E, Savarino L, Avnet S (2004) The influence of alumina and ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene particles on osteoblast-osteoclast cooperation. Biomaterials 25:4037–4045.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.10.100 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bächle M, Butz F, Hübner U, Bakalinis E, Kohal RJ (2007) Behavior of CAL72 osteoblast-like cells cultured on zirconia ceramics with different surface topographies. Clin Oral Implants Res 18:53–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Josset Y, OumHamed Z, Zarrinpour A, Lorenzato M, Adnet J-J, Laurent-Maquin D (1999) In vitro reactions of human osteoblasts in culture with zirconia and alumina ceramics. J Biomed Mater Res 47:481–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Aboushelib MN, Osman E, Jansen I, Everts V, Feilzer AJ (2013) Influence of a nanoporous zirconia implant surface of on cell viability of human osteoblasts. J Prosthodont 22:190–195.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00920.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Yoo K-D, Kim G-H, Il Noh D, Jang JW, Shim YB, Chun HJ (2013) In vitro evaluation of UHMWPE/zirconia composite using human peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Macromol Res 21:108–113.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13233-013-1055-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sadi AY, Homaeigohar SSH, Khavandi AR, Javadpour J (2004) The effect of partially stabilized zirconia on the mechanical properties of the hydroxyapatite ± polyethylene composites. Mater Sci 5:853–858Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pinto AM, Gonçalves IC, Magalhães FD (2013) Graphene-based materials biocompatibility: a review. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 111:188–202.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2013.05.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Polymeric Materials Research Group (PMRG), Department of Materials Science and EngineeringSharif University of TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations