Surface Comparison of Three Different Commercial Custom-Made Titanium Meshes Produced by SLM for Dental Applications

Cruz, Nuno; Martins, Maria Inês; Domingos Santos, José; Gil Mur, Javier; Tondela, João Paulo

doi:10.3390/ma13092177

Open AccessArticle

Surface Comparison of Three Different Commercial Custom-Made Titanium Meshes Produced by SLM for Dental Applications

by

Nuno Cruz

^1,*

,

Maria Inês Martins

²

,

José Domingos Santos

³

,

Javier Gil Mur

¹ and

João Paulo Tondela

⁴

¹

Faculty of Dentistry, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, 08017 Barcelona, Spain

²

Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto (FEUP), 4200-465 Porto, Portugal

³

REQUIMTE-LAQV, Department of Metallurgical Engineering and Materials, Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto (FEUP), 4200-465 Porto, Portugal

⁴

CIROS from the Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3004-504 Coimbra, Portugal

^*

Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Materials 2020, 13(9), 2177; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13092177

Submission received: 15 April 2020 / Revised: 5 May 2020 / Accepted: 6 May 2020 / Published: 8 May 2020

Download

Browse Figures

Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

The use of individualized titanium meshes has been referred to in scientific literature since 2011. There are many advantages to its use, however, the main complications are related to early or late exposures. As some aspects such as its surface properties have been pointed out to influence the soft tissue response, this study was designed to compare the surface characteristics of three commercially available individualized titanium meshes between them and according to the manufacturer’s specifications. The results from the scanning electron microscopy, energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction and the contact profilometry measurements were analyzed and cross-checked. It was discovered that, the BoneEasy’s post-processing superficial treatment was more refined, as it delivers the mesh with the lowest Ra value, 0.61 ± 0.14 µm, due to the applied electropolishing. On the other hand, the Yxoss CBR^® mesh from ReOss^® was sandblasted, presenting an extremely rough surface with a Ra of 6.59 ± 0.76 µm.

Keywords: biomaterial; bone regeneration; titanium mesh; 3D printing; surface properties; roughness

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Cruz, N.; Martins, M.I.; Domingos Santos, J.; Gil Mur, J.; Tondela, J.P. Surface Comparison of Three Different Commercial Custom-Made Titanium Meshes Produced by SLM for Dental Applications. Materials 2020, 13, 2177. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13092177

AMA Style

Cruz N, Martins MI, Domingos Santos J, Gil Mur J, Tondela JP. Surface Comparison of Three Different Commercial Custom-Made Titanium Meshes Produced by SLM for Dental Applications. Materials. 2020; 13(9):2177. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13092177

Chicago/Turabian Style

Cruz, Nuno, Maria Inês Martins, José Domingos Santos, Javier Gil Mur, and João Paulo Tondela. 2020. "Surface Comparison of Three Different Commercial Custom-Made Titanium Meshes Produced by SLM for Dental Applications" Materials 13, no. 9: 2177. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13092177

APA Style

Cruz, N., Martins, M. I., Domingos Santos, J., Gil Mur, J., & Tondela, J. P. (2020). Surface Comparison of Three Different Commercial Custom-Made Titanium Meshes Produced by SLM for Dental Applications. Materials, 13(9), 2177. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13092177

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Menu

Surface Comparison of Three Different Commercial Custom-Made Titanium Meshes Produced by SLM for Dental Applications

Abstract

Share and Cite

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI