Chemical and Structural Characterization of Sandlasted Surface of Dental Implant using ZrO2 Particle with Different Shape
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Presented paper is interesting for biomedical engineers and can be published in Coatings journal after revision.
General remarks:
- a paragraph describing chemical composition should be rewritten. On the base of obtained results Authors can not say anything about formation of oxide layer. Chemical composition of oxide layer should be compared with number of incorporated ZrO2 particles into samples surface. I think that incorporated nanoparticles are a source of oxygen on the surface.
- SEM images of samples before sandblasting should be presented
- what was roughness of samples surfaces (before and after sandblasting)?
- Authors can not use EDX method for quantitative analysis of lights elements (C, O)
Author Response
Dear Reviewer!
Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. Below ou can find answer for all you comments:
General remarks:
- a paragraph describing chemical composition should be rewritten. On the base of obtained results Authors can not say anything about formation of oxide layer. Chemical composition of oxide layer should be compared with number of incorporated ZrO2 particles into samples surface. I think that incorporated nanoparticles are a source of oxygen on the surface.
Reply. Thank you for the comment. The chapter was re-write and you suggestion taking into account and included in text. ZrO2 powder is the main source of oxygen and we pointed this in chapter
- SEM images of samples before sandblasting should be presented
Reply. Corrected
- what was roughness of samples surfaces (before and after sandblasting)?
Reply. Dear Reviewer, we are not aimed to study roughness and unfortuntly we have no access to such measurement. Additionally to all method we measure contact angle that is one of critical point for dental implant.
- Authors can not use EDX method for quantitative analysis of lights elements (C, O)
Reply. Sure EDX is a semi-quantitate method. Our detector allow to use this method for C and O detection in wt.%
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors show the non-contaminated zirconium-based alloys by sandblast treatment using ZrO2 particles. The manuscript suffers from numerous flaws, making it very difficult to read and evaluate.
1. As the commercially available dental implant modified by sandblast treatment with Al2O3 and acid treatment has been well established, there appears to be a lack of introductory material. I would anticipate that adding this more complete introduction would also require the addition of a number of additional references.
2. The author should also evaluate the effect of ZrO2 abrasives on the chemical composition of titanium implant.
3. The authors should show the surface roughness of zirconium alloy before and after sandblast treatment and whether ZrO2 abrasives can be used for surface modification of dental implants. Because ZrO2 abrasives is too heavy to add optimized surface roughness.
4. Discussion part is difficult to follow and needs rephrasing.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer!
Thank you for all you coments and suggestion.
We tried to do all the best to correct all mistakes and fill all gaps
1. As the commercially available dental implant modified by sandblast treatment with Al2O3 and acid treatment has been well established, there appears to be a lack of introductory material. I would anticipate that adding this more complete introduction would also require the addition of a number of additional references.
Reply. Paragraph (line 64-84 of first manuscript version) devoted about advantages and some limitation of currently used sandblasting methods. Addition of some more information can affect the total size of article. Using your recommendation we add some new information in discussion of obtained results.
2. The author should also evaluate the effect of ZrO2 abrasives on the chemical composition of titanium implant.
Reply. Zirconium-niobium system (KTZ-125) was used in current experiment. During evaluation we have obtained information about the chemical structure of implant surface before and after sandblasting(lines 189-204 of first manuscript version). Some data suggest that SB process did not influence of alloy chemical compound and act only for surface chemical structure.
3. The authors should show the surface roughness of zirconium alloy before and after sandblast treatment and whether ZrO2 abrasives can be used for surface modification of dental implants. Because ZrO2 abrasives is too heavy to add optimized surface roughness.
Reply. Dear Reviewer, we are not aimed to study roughness and unfortuntly we have no access to such measurement. Additionally to all method we measure contact angle that is one of critical point for dental implant.
4. Discussion part is difficult to follow and needs rephrasing.
Reply. Dear reviewer, thank you for your suggesting. We are completely rephrasing discussion part
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors, your manuscript is focused on the modification of the surface of the dental implant to increase its biocompatibility and osteointegration. Therefore, I suggest you add data on osteoblasts adhesion strength and their osteogenic differentiation.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer!
Thank you for all you comments and suggestion.
We tried to do all the best to correct all mistakes and fill all gaps
Dear Authors, your manuscript is focused on the modification of the surface of the dental implant to increase its biocompatibility and osteointegration. Therefore, I suggest you add data on osteoblasts adhesion strength and their osteogenic differentiation.
Reply. Dear Reviewer, we have done cell culture experiment using human osteoblast cells. Results represented in new version of manuscript
Reviewer 4 Report
Abstract needs significant improvement. It should provide, in your brief and precise words: 1. Importance of this specific topic; 2. How the study was done; 3. What was found; and 4. Conclusion. Please take time to be more accurate with your use of tenses (past perfect, past continuous, present perfect, etc.). Also, please follow MDPI-provided format.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer!
Thank you for all you coments and suggestion.
We tried to do all the best to correct all mistakes and fill all gaps
Abstract needs significant improvement. It should provide, in your brief and precise words: 1. Importance of this specific topic; 2. How the study was done; 3. What was found; and 4. Conclusion. Please take time to be more accurate with your use of tenses (past perfect, past continuous, present perfect, etc.). Also, please follow MDPI-provided format.
Reply. Dear Reviewer, we completely re-write abstract based on you recommendations
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
thank You for answer, however I think that roughness measurement should be performed. It is also very importsnt parameter, especially for hard tissue implants. So, I strongly suggest to do Ra measurements.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer!
Thank you for your comments!
We provided additional experiments to obtain information about implant roughness before and after SB process.
We add information to materials and method section as well as in results section.
Round 3
Reviewer 1 Report
Article can be published in a present form.
