Morphology and properties of foamed high crystallinity PEEK prepared by high temperature thermally induced phase separation

High Modulus, Strut-like poly(ether ether ketone) Aerogels Produced from a Benign Solvent

Poly(ether ether ketone) (PEEK) was found to form gels in the benign solvent 1,3-diphenylacetone (DPA). Gelation of PEEK in DPA was found to form an interconnected, strut-like morphology composed of polymer axialites. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a strut-like morphology for PEEK aerogels. PEEK/DPA gels were prepared by first dissolving PEEK in DPA at 320 °C. Upon cooling to 50 °C, PEEK crystallizes and forms a gel in DPA. The PEEK/DPA phase diagram indicated that phase separation occurs by solid-liquid phase separation, implying that DPA is a good solvent for PEEK. The Flory-Huggins interaction parameter, calculated as χ12 = 0.093 for the PEEK/DPA system, confirmed that DPA is a good solvent for PEEK. PEEK aerogels were prepared by solvent exchanging DPA to water then freeze-drying. PEEK aerogels were found to have densities between 0.09 and 0.25 g/cm3, porosities between 80 and 93%, and surface areas between 200 and 225 m2/g, depending on the initial gel concentration. Using nitrogen adsorption analyses, PEEK aerogels were found to be mesoporous adsorbents, with mesopore sizes of about 8 nm, which formed between stacks of platelike crystalline lamellae. Scanning electron microscopy and X-ray scattering were utilized to elucidate the hierarchical structure of the PEEK aerogels. Morphological analysis found that the PEEK/DPA gels were composed of a highly nucleated network of PEEK axialites (i.e., aggregates of stacked crystalline lamellae). The highly connected axialite network imparted robust mechanical properties on PEEK aerogels, which were found to densify less upon freeze-drying than globular PEEK aerogel counterparts gelled from dichloroacetic acid (DCA) or 4-chlorphenol (4CP). PEEK aerogels formed from DPA were also found to have a modulus-density scaling that was far more efficient in supporting loads than the poorly connected aerogels formed from PEEK/DCA or PEEK/4CP solutions. The strut-like morphology in these new PEEK aerogels also significantly improved the modulus to a degree that is comparable to high-performance crosslinked aerogels based on polyimide and polyurea of comparable densities.

Fabrication of a novel aesthetic orthodontic bracket and evaluation of friction properties between PEEK and stainless steel wires

BACKGROUND

Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is a polyaromatic semi-crystalline thermoplastic polymer with mechanical and lubrication properties favorable for biomedical applications. Despite of its aesthetic appearance, ceramic brackets are unsatisfactory in brittleness and thickness, while PEEK is a potential material for aesthetic orthodontic brackets.

OBJECTIVE

To fabricate a novel aesthetic orthodontic bracket and evaluate friction properties of PEEK and stainless steel wires.

METHODS

All polyether ether ketone (PEEK) and ceramic samples disks were made into disks (diameter, 5 mm; thickness, 2 mm). The tested surfaces of PEEK were ground with #600, #800 and #1200 SiC papers, followed by polishing with Sof-Lex kit (3M ESPE, USA). The surface roughness was tested using a laser profilometer device (VK-X200, Keyence, Japan). The COFs of the specimens and stainless steel (SS) archwires were tested using a Universal Micro-Tribotester (UMT-3, Bruker, USA). The wear scratches on the materials' surfaces were examined by using a scanning electron microscope (SEM) (Hitachi SU8010). The elastic modulus and hardness of samples were examined with a nano-indenter (XP, Keysight Technologies, USA).

RESULTS

The mean surface roughness of PEEK and Ceramic are 0.320 ± 0.028 μm and 0.343 ± 0.044 μm, respectively. PEEK has a lower Friction coefficient than Ceramic and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P< 0.05). The abrasive wear of Ceramic was the main wear style and was characterized by the observation of chipping fractures, while PEEK surface looked smooth without obvious scale-like desquamations and granular debris, indicating adhesive wear.

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of the present study, PEEK shows lower coefficient of friction than ceramic. PEEK has excellent properties such as low friction coefficient, smooth surface and good mechanical properties, and thus meets the requirements for orthodontic brackets. It is considered as a potential bracket material with both low friction and aesthetic performance.

Assessing biocompatibility & mechanical testing of 3D-printed PEEK versus milled PEEK

Objectives

To compare mechanical properties of 3D-printed and milled poly-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK) materials. To define post-production treatments to enhance biocompatibility of 3D-printed PEEK.

Methods

Standardised PEEK samples were produced via milling and fused-deposition-modelling 3D-printing. To evaluate mechanical properties, tensile strength, maximum flexural strength, fracture toughness, and micro-hardness were measured.3D printed samples were sandblasted with 50 or 125 μm aluminium oxide beads to increase biocompatibility.Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) evaluated microstructure of 3D-printed and sandblasted samples, estimating surface roughness at scales from 1mm-1μm.Cell adhesion on 3D printed and sandblasted materials was evaluated by culturing primary human endothelial cells and osteoblasts (HUVEC, HOBS) and evaluating cell growth over 48 h.

Results

3D printed materials had lower tensile strength, flexural strength, and fracture toughness, but higher micro-hardness.SEM analysis of 3D-printed surfaces showed sandblasting with 125 and 50 μm silica particles removed printing defects and created roughened surfaces for increased HUVEC and HOBs uniform cell adhesion and distribution. No cytotoxicity was observed over a 48h period, and all cells demonstrated >95% viability.

Clinical significance

3D-printing of PEEK is an emerging technology with clear advantages over milling in maxillofacial implant production. Nonetheless, this manufacturing modality may produce 3D printed PEEK devices with lower mechanical resistance parameters compared to milled PEEK but with values compatible with natural bone. PEEK has poor osteoconductivity and ability to osseointegrate. Sandblasting is an inexpensive modality to remove irregular surface defects and create uniform micro-rough surfaces supporting cell attachment and potentially enhancing integration of PEEK implants with host tissue.