Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40843443›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025

Effects of sandblasting and acid etching on the surface properties of additively manufactured and machined titanium and their consequences for osteoblast adhesion under different storage conditions.

Osman Akbas, Amit Gaikwad, Leif Reck, Nina Ehlert, Anne Jahn, Jörg Hermsdorf, Andreas Winkel, Meike Stiesch, Andreas Greuling

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

9 authors.

Osman AkbasDepartment of Prosthetic Dentistry and Biomedical Materials Science, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Amit GaikwadDepartment of Prosthetic Dentistry and Biomedical Materials Science, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Leif ReckDepartment of Prosthetic Dentistry and Biomedical Materials Science, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Nina EhlertLower Saxony Centre for Biomedical Engineering, Implant Research and Development, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Anne JahnLaser Zentrum Hannover e.V., Hannover, Germany.
Jörg HermsdorfLaser Zentrum Hannover e.V., Hannover, Germany.
Andreas WinkelDepartment of Prosthetic Dentistry and Biomedical Materials Science, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Meike StieschDepartment of Prosthetic Dentistry and Biomedical Materials Science, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Andreas GreulingDepartment of Prosthetic Dentistry and Biomedical Materials Science, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Additive manufacturing (AM) enables the production of complex, patient-specific titanium implants. However, the as-built surfaces of AM parts often require postprocessing to enhance surface properties for optimal osseointegration. Methods: This study investigates the effects of varying sandblasting pressures (2 bar vs. 6 bar) and subsequent acid etching (SAE) on the surface properties of additively manufactured and machined titanium (Ti-6Al-4V and commercially pure titanium (cp-Ti), respectively). While changes in surface roughness and morphology were assessed at different process stages using optical profilometry and scanning electron microscopy, the analyses of surface wettability (contact angle measurement) were focused on effects after SAE and during different storage conditions (ambient air vs. NaCl). The resulting differences in material properties were then evaluated for their biological impact on osteoblast compatibility. For this purpose, the parameters cell adhesion, morphology, and membrane integrity were investigated using confocal laser microscopy and LDH assay. Results: Initial high roughness of AM titanium surfaces was decreased by sandblasting, while initial smooth machined surfaces (MM) increased in roughness. Acid etching introduced characteristic irregular patterns on the surface with only marginal consequences for the resulting overall roughness. While all surfaces demonstrated high hydrophilicity directly after etching, storage under ambient air increased hydrophobicity over time, while NaCl storage preserved hydrophilicity and improved biocompatibility marginally. Osteoblast adhesion and morphology were optimal only under no storage condition, with uncompromised membrane integrity. Discussion: Notably, the biological consequences observed for MM and AM titanium were rather similar, considering the differences in used materials, production techniques, and subsequent surface morphologies. Carefully applied SAE can also optimize the surface characteristics of additive manufactured titanium for an improved implant performance, with storage conditions critically influencing surface wettability and bioactivity.

Indexed as

additive manufacturingcontact anglecytocompatibilitydental implantsSAEsandblasting and acid etchingSLAsurface wettability

Identifiers

PMID40843443
PMCPMC12364894

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.