ArticleJournal of Indian Prosthodontic Society2024
Comparative evaluation on surface nanohardness, surface microhardness, surface roughness, and wettability of plant-based organic nanoparticle reinforced polyetheretherketone as an implant material - An in vitro study.
Article in Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Green Synthesis of Ag and Cu Nanoparticles UsingMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimSynthetic inorganic materials are commonly used as reinforcing agents in polyetheretherketone (PEEK) composite, whereas natural organic plant-based reinforcing agents are negligible. Surface hardness, roughness, and wettability are indicative factors of osseointegration behavior to be used as an implant material. This study evaluated micro surface hardness (MSH), nano surface hardness (NSH), surface roughness (SR), and contact angle (CA) of PEEK-Azadirachta indica reinforced at 10 wt%, 20 wt%, and 30 wt%. SETTINGS AND
designThis was an in vitro study. MATERIALS AND
methodsNeem (A. indica) leaf nanoparticles were prepared and reinforced with PEEK powder at 10%, 20%, and 30% weight ratios by injection molding. Sixty specimens underwent the microhardness and CA testing using a digital microhardness tester, and CA goniometer, respectively, and later nanoindentation test to analyze the nanohardness and SR. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: A one-way ANOVA test with a 95% confidence interval for MSH and NSH, SR, and CA was performed on the samples. A post hoc Bonferroni test was conducted (α = 0.05) to compare the groups.
resultsThere was a significant increase in nanohardness (P = 0.000) with zero difference in microhardness (P = 0.514). The addition of 10 wt%, 20 wt%, and 30 wt% nanoparticles increased the SR value of the pure PEEK from 273.19 nm to 284.10 (3.99%), 296.91 (8.68%), and 287.54 (5.24%), respectively. In the analysis of the CA, CA 20% shows the lowest angle (63.69) with the highest for control specimens (82.39). There is an increase in the PEEK composite SR with a decrease in CA.
conclusionsThe addition of plant-derived nanoparticles into the PEEK matrix has a significant impact on the hardness and hydrophobicity enhancing cell growth and osteoblastic differentiation during osseointegration of dental implants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.