Understanding biomaterial-tissue interface quality: combined in vitro evaluation

Figures & data

Figure 1. Principal connections and interactions between the physical stimuli and materials parameters. Numbers in brackets indicate respective tensor rank.

Figure 2. The philosophy of pentataxis concept (MHD, magnetohydrodynamics).

Table 1. Fundamental stimuli and pentataxis forces with the respective phenomena (simplified).

Gradients of stimuli:	Fundamental acting stimuli
	Temperature (T)	Pressure (P)	Charge (Q)	Energy (U)	Chemical potential (μ)
∇Theat flux q	Conductivity, radiation	Thermal flow	Thermoelectric current	Thermal stress	Thermal diffusion
∇Pfluid flow V	Convection	Viscosity	Baro-electric current	Fluid stress	Baro-diffusion
∇Qelectric field E	Peltier heat flux	Streaming potential	Electrical conductivity	Polarization stress	Electromobility, electro-osmosis
∇U force F	Dissipation heat	Fluid pumping	Piezoelectricity	Stiffness	Stress diffusion
∇μ species flux J	Convective heat	Swelling, shrinking	Charge separation (e.g. membranes)	Concentration stress	Diffusivity

Table 2. Comparison of periodontal (= adjacent to natural tooth) and peri-implant (= adjacent to implant biomaterial) soft tissues and their attachment (adapted from [72,75]).

	Periodontal soft tissue	Peri-implant soft tissue
Attachment to …	root cementum	directly to implant surface
Supported by …	alveolar bone, periodontal ligament, cementum	basal lamina, hemidesmosomes
Connective tissue collagen bundles are…	perpendicular	parallel
Connective tissue composition has …	60% collagen, 5%–15% fibroblasts	85% collagen, 1%–3% fibroblasts
Vascular plexus blood supply via …	periodontal ligament	missing or insufficient
Wound healing acting for …	no wound healing	initial phase  location of junctional epithelium. Granulation tissue  can result in loosening of abutment

Figure 3. Timeline for healing of an implant and readout areas for 7 and 14 days in vitro, adapted from [72].

Figure 4. The concept of the biomaterials enhanced simulation testing [80–82].

Figure 5. The dental abutment test concept (based on [72]) for the BEST platform (DO, dissolved oxygen; DAQ, data acquisition; POST, post-processing data treatment; pCO₂, CO₂ partial pressure; MCDA, multi-criteria decision aiding).

Figure 6. An example of mucosal tissue-abutment interface quality measurement with BEST (Figure 5), expressed as modulus under: a) pseudo-static loading part (‘creeping’); and b) dynamic loading (1 Hz, 30 μm deformation amplitude).

Närhi H. Characterization of soft tissue adhesion on the surface of dental biomaterials [ M.Sc. Thesis]. Finland: Aalto University; 2016. p. 97.

 Google Scholar