Scholarlink

Objectives <p>This study evaluated how distinct surface-modification protocols and storage time affect the wettability, surface free energy (SFE), and elemental composition of zirconia.</p> Materials and methods <p>Zirconia specimens were subjected to six surface conditioning methods: Control (CT), alumina airborne-particle abrasion (110&#xa0;μm) (AL), tribochemical silica coating (30&#xa0;μm) (SI), chemical etching (ET), alumina+etching (AL-ET), and laser treatment (LS). Measurements were taken at baseline and after 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Wettability was evaluated with water and diiodomethane contact angles to calculate work of adhesion (WoA) and surface free energy (SFE) via the Owens-Wendt-Rabel-Kaelble method. Elemental composition was assessed by energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. Data analysis involved one-way ANOVA with Tukey`s post-hoc tests for treatment comparison and two-way ANOVA for storage-time effects.</p> Results <p>Surface conditioning significantly affected contact angle, WoA, and SFE (p &lt; 0.05), compared to storage. SI had the lowest water contact angles, highest WoA, and highest SFE, with a strong polar component. AL improved wettability and SFE, but less than SI. While ET showed the least hydrophilic properties at baseline but improved over time, LS was intermediate and stable. CT became more hydrophilic after 6–12 months and SI remained best. EDS confirmed these trends, with persistent silica, low aluminum after alumina treatment, and treatment-dependent elemental changes. The CT and LS spectra resembled those of the substrate.</p> Conclusions <p>Both the surface-modification strategy and storage time affected zirconia wettability, with surface modification playing a greater role. While tribochemical silica coating created a durable, hydrophilic surface, Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> was less effective. Etching needed time to remove residues and laser treatment offered intermediate stability.</p> Clinical relevance <p>Tribochemical silica coating provided the best zirconia implant surface by maintaining a durable, hydrophilic, high surface-free energy state tha<i>t may promote</i> early protein interaction and predictable osseointegration.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Hydrophilicity, wettability, and elemental analysis of zirconia implant ceramic after surface conditioning methods as a function of storage time

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月6日

查看全文
  • Dario Philipp Luterbach,
  • Luiza Freitas Brum Souza,
  • Tan Fırat Eyüboğlu,
  • Mutlu Özcan

摘要

Objectives

This study evaluated how distinct surface-modification protocols and storage time affect the wettability, surface free energy (SFE), and elemental composition of zirconia.

Materials and methods

Zirconia specimens were subjected to six surface conditioning methods: Control (CT), alumina airborne-particle abrasion (110 μm) (AL), tribochemical silica coating (30 μm) (SI), chemical etching (ET), alumina+etching (AL-ET), and laser treatment (LS). Measurements were taken at baseline and after 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Wettability was evaluated with water and diiodomethane contact angles to calculate work of adhesion (WoA) and surface free energy (SFE) via the Owens-Wendt-Rabel-Kaelble method. Elemental composition was assessed by energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. Data analysis involved one-way ANOVA with Tukey`s post-hoc tests for treatment comparison and two-way ANOVA for storage-time effects.

Results

Surface conditioning significantly affected contact angle, WoA, and SFE (p < 0.05), compared to storage. SI had the lowest water contact angles, highest WoA, and highest SFE, with a strong polar component. AL improved wettability and SFE, but less than SI. While ET showed the least hydrophilic properties at baseline but improved over time, LS was intermediate and stable. CT became more hydrophilic after 6–12 months and SI remained best. EDS confirmed these trends, with persistent silica, low aluminum after alumina treatment, and treatment-dependent elemental changes. The CT and LS spectra resembled those of the substrate.

Conclusions

Both the surface-modification strategy and storage time affected zirconia wettability, with surface modification playing a greater role. While tribochemical silica coating created a durable, hydrophilic surface, Al2O3 was less effective. Etching needed time to remove residues and laser treatment offered intermediate stability.

Clinical relevance

Tribochemical silica coating provided the best zirconia implant surface by maintaining a durable, hydrophilic, high surface-free energy state that may promote early protein interaction and predictable osseointegration.