4.6 Review

Electrochemical methods for fabrication of polymers/calcium phosphates nanocomposites as hard tissue implants

期刊

APPLIED PHYSICS REVIEWS
卷 6, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.5045339

关键词

-

资金

  1. Deanship of Scientific Research, King Faisal University [186133]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Developing and manipulating new biomaterials is an ongoing topic for their needs in medical uses. The evolution and development of new biomaterials, in both the academic and industrial sectors, have been encouraged due to the dramatic improvement in medicine and medical-related technologies. Due to the drawbacks associated with natural biomaterials, the use of synthetic biomaterials is preferential due to basic and applied aspects. Various techniques are involved in fabricating biomaterials. Among them are the electrochemical-based methods, which include electrodeposition and electrophoretic methods. Although electrospinning and electrospraying are not typical electrochemical methods, they are also reviewed in this article due to their importance. Many remarkable features can be acquired from this technique. Electrodeposition and electrophoretic deposition are exceptional and valuable processes for fabricating thin or thick coated films on a surface of metallic implants. Electrodeposition and electrophoretic deposition have some common positive features. They can be used at low temperatures, do not affect the structure of the implant, and can be applied to complex shapes, and they can produce superior properties, such as quick and uniform coating. Furthermore, they can possibly control the thickness and chemical composition of the coatings. Electrospinning is a potentially emerging and efficient process for producing materials with nanofibrous structures, which have exceptional characteristics such as mechanical properties, pore size, and superior surface area. These specialized characteristics induce these nanostructured materials to be used in different technologies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据