4.8 Article

Evaluation of mechanical properties and biological response of an alumina-forming Ni-free ferritic alloy

Journal

BIOMATERIALS
Volume 26, Issue 18, Pages 3861-3871

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.09.058

Keywords

steel; in vitro tests; mechanical properties; biocompatibility; oxidation; alumina; cell culture; surface modification

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PM 2000 is a Ni-free oxide dispersion strengthened Fe-20Cr-5Al alloy able to develop a fine, dense and tightly adherent alpha-alumina scale during high-temperature oxidation. Despite the high temperature involved during thermal oxidation (1100 degreesC), microstructural changes in the candidate material, a hot rolled product, hardly occurs. Consequently, the good mechanical properties of the as-received material are not significantly affected. Moreover, due to the high compressive residual stresses at the alumina scale, an increase in the fatigue limit from 500 to 530 MPa is observed. Such stresses also account for the high capability of the coating/metal system to withstand more than 1% tensile deformation without cracking. The biocompatibility of the alloy was assessed in comparison to commercial alumina. Saos-2 osteoblast-like cells were either challenged with PM 2000 particles, or seeded onto PM 2000 (with and without scale) solid samples. Viability, growth, and ALP release from cells were assessed after 3 or 7 days, while mineralization was checked at 18 days. This study has demonstrated that PM 2000 with and without scale are capable of supporting in vitro growth and function of osteoblast-like cells over a period of 18 days. Results from this study suggest that the resulting alumina/alloy system combines the good mechanical properties of the alloy with the superior biocompatibility of the alpha-alumina, for which there is very good clinical experience. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available