Characterization and cellular response of 3D-scaffold functionalized with PLA nanofibers

Abstract

To compare the Cyclic Fatigue Limit (CFL) of a control yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia pollycristal (Y-TZP) with a composite produced by adding multi-walled carbon nanotubes (CNT) into Y-TZP. Materials and methods: CNT were coated with zirconium oxide and yttrium oxide to form a powder (CNT/ZYO) using a hydrothermal co-precipitation method. Powders made of Y-TZP + (CNT/ZYO) were produced using 99 vol% of Y-TZP and 1 vol% of CNT/ZYO. CAD-CAM blocks (42.5 × 16.0 × 16.0 mm) were obtained by uniaxial pressing (67 MPa/30 s) of each powder in a steel matrix. These blocks were partially sintered at argon atmosphere (1100 • C/1 h/5 • C/s) and then sectioned to produce 14 bar-shaped specimens (3.0 × 4.0 × 25.0 mm/edges chamfered according to ISO6872:2008) of each material, which were sintered also in argon atmosphere (1.400 • C/4 h/5 • C/min). Density measured by Archimedes' method was used to calculate the relative density (RD), based on the theoretical values for both materials (6.06 g/cm 3). Flexural strength (FS) was measured in four-point bending with specimens immersed in water at 37 • C (inner and outer supports of 10 and 20 mm). CFL was determined in four-point bending, using the staircase method (10,000 cycles/5 Hz). In each cycle, the stress varied between the maximum stress (MS) and 50% of MS. The applied stress in the first specimen was 50% of FS. After 10,000 cycles, in case the specimen did not fracture, 10 MPa was added to the next specimen. RD and FS were analyzed by Student's t test (alpha = 5%). CFL was calculated according to: CLF = X0 + d(SUMini/SUMni ± 0.5), where X0 is the lowest stress value tested, d is the stress added or subtracted to each cycle and n is the number specimens that survived or failed in each stress level. The lowest stress level was computed as i = 0, and the next one was computed as i = 1, and so on. Fracture surfaces were fractographically analyzed. Results: Specimens containing nanotubes showed significantly lower RD compared to the control (p = 0.009). Nanotube addition also caused a 50% significant decrease in FS (p = 0.003). However, the FS coefficient of variation for the control was higher (17%) compared to that of the composite (10%). CFL calculated for the control was 2.5 times higher than that of the composite. The %CFL (CFL in terms of percentage of the FS) was also higher for the control. Fractography indicated fracture origins associated to surface defects and porous regions related to nanotube agglomerates.