Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35458382›Full record

ArticlePolymers2022

Improved Mechanical Properties and Bioactivity of Silicate Based Bioceramics Reinforced Poly(ether-ether-ketone) Nanocomposites for Prosthetic Dental Implantology.

Noha Taymour, Amal E Fahmy, Mohamed Abdel Hady Gepreel, Sherif Kandil, Ahmed Abd El-Fattah

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Polymers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Biomimetic Coatings in Implant Dentistry: A Quick Update.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023
    Review
  10. Comparative Evaluation of TiONanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Bioceramics in Endodontics: Updates and Future Perspectives.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Noha TaymourDepartment of Substitutive Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam 31441, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-1527-638X
Amal E FahmyDepartment of Dental Materials, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Azarita, Alexandria 21526, Egypt.
Mohamed Abdel Hady GepreelDepartment of Materials Science and Engineering, Egypt-Japan University of Science and Technology (E-JUST), New Borg El-Arab City 21934, Egypt.ORCID 0000-0001-5223-8182
Sherif KandilDepartment of Materials Science, Institute of Graduate Studies and Research, Alexandria University, El-Shatby, Alexandria 21526, Egypt.
Ahmed Abd El-FattahDepartment of Materials Science, Institute of Graduate Studies and Research, Alexandria University, El-Shatby, Alexandria 21526, Egypt.ORCID 0000-0002-9282-8504
Alexandria University · EGEgypt-Japan University of Science and Technology · EGImam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University · SAUniversity of Bahrain · BH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) biomaterial has been increasingly employed for orthopedic, trauma, spinal, and dental implants due to its biocompatibility and in vivo stability. However, a lack of bioactivity and binding ability to natural bone tissue has significantly limited PEEK for many challenging dental implant applications. In this work, nanocomposites based on PEEK reinforced with bioactive silicate-based bioceramics (forsterite or bioglass) as nanofillers were prepared using high energy ball milling followed by melt blending and compression molding. The influence of nanofillers type and content (10, 20 and 30 wt.%) on the crystalline structure, morphology, surface roughness, hydrophilicity, microhardness, elastic compression modulus, and flexural strength of the nanocomposites was investigated. The scanning electron microscopy images of the nanocomposites with low nanofillers content showed a homogenous surface with uniform dispersion within the PEEK matrix with no agglomerates. All nanocomposites showed an increased surface roughness compared to pristine PEEK. It was found that the incorporation of 20 wt.% forsterite was the most effective in the nanocomposite formulation compared with bioglass-based nanocomposites; it has significantly improved the elastic modulus, flexural strength, and microhardness. In vitro bioactivity evaluation, which used biomimetic simulated body fluid indicated the ability of PEEK nanocomposites loaded with forsterite or bioglass nanofillers to precipitate calcium and phosphate bone minerals on its surface. These nanocomposites are expected to be used in long-term load-bearing implant applications and could be recommended as a promising alternative to titanium and zirconia when used as a dental implant material.

Indexed as

bioactivitybioglassdental implantelastic modulusflexural strengthforsteritemicrohardnessnanocompositesPEEK

Identifiers

PMID35458382
PMCPMC9026494
OpenAlexW4224210590

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.