Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Final Paper On Tdi
Final Paper On Tdi
Final Paper On Tdi
A Paper On
7 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 12
8 Reference ............................................................................................................................. 13
Table of figures
1
2 Host Response to Biomaterial
The body's response to the implantation or introduction of a foreign substance into it is referred to
as the "host response to biomaterials"[1]. The host reaction is a critical factor in deciding whether
biomaterial integration in medical devices, implants, or tissue engineering applications is
successful or not. The host reaction can be broken down into the following stages[2].
2
3.Surface Modification
Biomaterials that are used in manufacturing various things i.e., implants, prosthetics, drugs, etc.
are of different types. Same biomaterials can be used for manufacturing different things but it will
display different kind of reaction according to the environment they will placed[2]. Each
biomaterial will show different kinds of compatibility with the environment inside body. So,
according to the requirement of the environment, they need to have certain properties. In scientific
terms, biocompatibility is required. Biocompatibility is a general term describing the property of
a material being compatible with living tissue. To attend biocompatibility of the materials, surface
modification is required[1]. Surface modification in general means modifying the surface of the
materials by changing its properties. This helps the developer to maximize the performance of the
biomaterial system. Each and every biomaterial have two types of properties i.e., bulk and surface
properties. Among these two properties the foremost important properties in biomaterials are
surface properties. Surface properties simply means the properties of the surface of any materials.
These surface properties include roughness, patterns, wettability, surface mobility, etc. To make
surface of the implant biocompatible modification of these properties are required. Surface
modification is the act of modifying the surface of a material by bringing physical, chemical or
biological characteristics different from the ones originally found on the surface of material. Some
of the methods of surface modification are sol-gel, chemical vapor deposition, physical vapor
deposition, glow discharge plasma treatment[2].
3
4 Materials and Methods of Surface Modification
The numerous techniques, including the contact angle method, secondary ions mass spectroscopy
(SIMS), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), electron spectroscopy for chemical analysis
(ESCA), attenuated total reflection infrared spectroscopy (ATR), and others, can be used to
measure the surface properties of a biomaterial [2]. These techniques can be used to gather
biomaterial/host interaction important knowledge about biomaterial tools that can be utilized to
investigate how biological systems interact with living systems[5].
The initial reaction that occurs after an implant is inserted into the body is a reaction between
bodily fluid and the implant's surface. Therefore, surface modification is necessary for the
implant's surface to respond as needed. The processes are described in more detail below.
4.1 Sol-gel
Sol-gel consists of two terms, sol and gel. A sol can be defined as a colloidal suspension of very
small solid particles in a continuous liquid. Gel can be defined as a substance that contains a
continuous solid skeleton a surrounding liquid phase. The two different techniques that are usually
used to carry out the sol gel process (i) spin coating technique and (ii) dip coating technique. In
spin coating technique the specimens are rotate to spread the coating solution on the substrate by
using centrifugal force where in dip coating specimens are dipped or submerged in the titanium
substrate with high adhesion and good bioactivity. And it is reported that plasma spray method
results for chemical inhomogeneity and low crystallinity of HA coating on titanium alloys. In
contrast, sol-gel technique produces high crystalline HA microstructure and better chemical
homogeneity due to of its ability to mix the calcium and phosphorus precursors at molecular-level.
They also found that atomic diffusion accelerated when increasing the calcining temperature or
prolong the calcining time. Other advantages of sol-gel method in comparison with other
conventional thin layer oxidation processes are low densification temperature and better control of
the homogeneity, chemical composition and crystalline structure of the thin coating, iii) Cost
effective and less complicated equipment [5].
4
Figure 2:Schematic diagram of sol-gel processing
5
Figure 3:Typical setup for CVD
6
and risks of plasma treatment for surface preparation of metallic materials are investigated
experimentally using titanium as a model system, and it is also discussed in more general terms.
Samples were treated by different low-pressure direct current plasmas and analyzed using Auger
electron spectroscopy (AES), x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), atomic force microscopy,
scanning electron microscopy, and light microscopy. The plasma system is a home-built, ultra-
high vacuum-compatible system that allows sample introduction via a load-lock, and precise
control of pressure, gas composition and flow rate, etc. This allows uniform treatment cylindrical
and screw shaped samples [8].With an appropriate plasma parameter, argon plasma removes all
chemical traces from former treatments in effect producing cleaner and more well-controlled
surfaces than with conventional preparation methods. Removal rates up to 30 nm/min are possible
[3].
• Surface Roughness: Modifying the surface roughness of a biomaterial can influence cellular
behavior, such as adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation. By controlling the roughness at
the micro or nano-scale, surface modifications can enhance tissue integration, promote cell
alignment, and modulate cell signaling pathways.
7
• Surface Topography: Manipulating the surface topography of biomaterials can have profound
effects on cell adhesion, migration, and tissue growth. Textured surfaces with defined patterns
or features can mimic the natural extracellular matrix, facilitating cell-surface interactions and
guiding tissue regeneration.
• Porosity: Altering the porosity of biomaterials can impact their permeability, diffusion rates,
and cellular infiltration. Controlled pore size and distribution allow for the precise regulation
of nutrient and oxygen transport, facilitating tissue regeneration and engineering.
• Mechanical Properties: Changing the mechanical properties, such as stiffness or elasticity, of
biomaterials can significantly influence their behavior and response in the host environment.
Biomaterials with tunable mechanical properties can better match the mechanical cues of
native tissues, promoting appropriate cell signaling, and improving integration and
functionality.
• Surface Energy: Adjusting the surface energy of a biomaterial can influence its wetting
behavior and interactions with surrounding fluids or tissues. By modifying the surface energy,
surface modifications can control protein adsorption, cell attachment, and bacterial adhesion,
leading to improved biocompatibility and reduced risk of infection.
• Surface Charge: Modulating the surface charge of biomaterials affects their interaction with
charged molecules, proteins, and cells. By changing the surface charge through chemical
modifications, biomaterials can be tailored to promote or inhibit specific cellular responses,
enhance drug delivery, or prevent unwanted interactions.
• Optical Properties: Altering the optical properties of biomaterials, such as absorption,
scattering, or fluorescence, can enable applications in imaging, diagnostics, and therapeutics.
Surface modifications can introduce optical probes, nanoparticles, or dyes, allowing for
targeted imaging or controlled light-based therapies.
• Thermal Conductivity: Changing the thermal conductivity of biomaterials can be crucial in
applications such as thermal therapy, biosensors, or thermal management in medical devices.
Surface modifications can introduce thermally conductive coatings or materials to enhance or
control heat transfer.
By selectively modifying these physical properties, biomaterials can be precisely tailored to suit
specific applications, improving their performance, functionality, and biocompatibility. These
8
surface modifications have the potential to revolutionize field such as tissue engineering,
regenerative medicine, drug delivery, and medical device development, ultimately leading to better
patient outcomes and quality of life.
9
altering the charge density, adding functional groups that are charged, or generating charge
gradients on the surface of the material.
• Degradation Rate: Surface alterations can regulate how quickly biomaterials deteriorate.
Biomaterials can be made to disintegrate at specified rates that correspond
• to the intended tissue repair or regeneration process by modifying their chemical makeup or
adding degradable component.
• Anti-fouling and anti-bacterial qualities can be added to surfaces by surface modifications in
the form of coatings or functional groups. These alterations can lessen the possibility of
infection or biofouling by preventing the attachment and growth of bacteria or other microbes
on the biomaterial's surface.
• Surface alterations provide a potent tool for designing biomaterials to accomplish desired
interactions with host environments by changing these chemical properties, opening up
applications in tissue engineering, drug delivery, biosensing, and other biomedical domains[6].
These applications highlight the versatility and importance of surface modification techniques in
optimizing the properties and performance of biomaterials for various biomedical, diagnostic, and
biotechnological applications[6].
11
7 Conclusion
In summary, the control and modulation of material/host interactions through physical and
chemical properties have significant implications across various disciplines. Surface modification
techniques allow for precise control over biomaterial behavior, enhancing biocompatibility,
functionality, and performance. By manipulating physical properties such as surface roughness,
topography, porosity, and mechanical properties, as well as chemical characteristics such as surf
ace chemistry and biomolecular recognition, researchers can tailor biomaterials to specific
applications. These advancements have the potential to revolutionize fields such as tissue
engineering, regenerative medicine, and drug delivery, ultimately improving patient outcomes and
quality of life.
In conclusion, the ability to control material/host interactions through surface modification opens
up new possibilities for innovation and advancement. By adjusting physical and chemical
properties, researchers can enhance tissue integration, guide cell behavior, regulate drug delivery,
and prevent infections. The precise tailoring of biomaterials through surface modifications has far-
reaching implications for various scientific and technical disciplines, paving the way for improved
biomedical applications and ultimately benefiting patients in diverse healthcare settings.
12
8 Reference
[1] A. Baki, C. V Rahman, L. J. White, D. J. Scurr, O. Qutachi, and K. M. Shakesheff, “Surface
modification of PdlLGA microspheres with gelatine methacrylate: Evaluation of adsorption,
entrapment, and oxygen plasma treatment approaches.,” Acta Biomater., vol. 53, pp. 450–459, Apr.
2017, doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2017.01.042.
[6] W. Lu, J. Sun, and X. Jiang, “Recent advances in electrospinning technology and
biomedical applications of electrospun fibers.,” J. Mater. Chem. B, vol. 2, no. 17, pp. 2369–2380,
May 2014, doi: 10.1039/c3tb21478h.
[7] L. L. Hench, “Biomaterials.,” Science, vol. 208, no. 4446, pp. 826–31, May 1980, doi:
10.1126/science.6246576.
[8] T. Velnar, G. Bunc, R. Klobucar, and L. Gradisnik, “Biomaterials and host versus graft
response: a short review.,” Bosn. J. basic Med. Sci., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 82–90, Feb. 2016,
doi: 10.17305/bjbms.2016.525.
[9] J. M. Anderson and J. J. Langone, “Issues and perspectives on the biocompatibility and
immunotoxicity evaluation of implanted controlled release systems.,” J. Control. Release,
vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 107–13, Feb. 1999, doi: 10.1016/s0168-3659(98)00178-3.
13