Soraya Shahnaz Tadjoedin E, Sunarso. Fabrication and mechanical properties of newly developed triphasic blocks composed of gypsum-brushite-monetite for bone graft applications.
Saudi Dent J 2022;
34:757-762. [PMID:
36570579 PMCID:
PMC9767863 DOI:
10.1016/j.sdentj.2022.11.005]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2022] [Revised: 11/06/2022] [Accepted: 11/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective
A triphasic bone graft block composed of gypsum, brushite, and monetite is expected to be better for regenerating bone than a gypsum-hydroxyapatite-tricalcium phosphate block. Therefore, the aim of this study was to fabricate and evaluate the mechanical properties of a newly developed triphasic block composed of gypsum, brushite, and monetite.
Materials and method
Triphasic blocks were prepared by mixing calcium sulfate hemihydrate, brushite, and monetite powders with distilled water at a powder-to-liquid ratio of 0.5. The content of calcium sulfate hemihydrate was fixed at 50%, and the contents of brushite and monetite powders were varied. After molding and setting, the obtained blocks were characterized, and their mechanical properties were evaluated.
Results
The triphasic blocks were prepared and could maintain their shape without collapsing. The XRD characterization of the obtained triphasic blocks showed that only three phases existed in the block. Calcium sulfate hemihydrate was transformed into its dihydrate form and provided mechanical strength to the block through a setting mechanism. The transformation of calcium sulfate hemihydrate into its dihydrate crystals formed an interlocked structure that was disrupted in triphasic blocks, as observed in SEM images. The disruption of the interlocked structure resulted in lower mechanical strength of the obtained triphasic blocks compared to the set gypsum control. The variation in brushite and monetite composition did not affect the mechanical properties of the triphasic blocks.
Conclusion
The triphasic gypsum-brushite-monetite block was successfully prepared, and no other crystal phases were found. The triphasic blocks could maintain their shape after setting. The addition of brushite and monetite powders disrupted the interlocked structure of the set gypsum crystal, resulting in a decrease in mechanical strength. Furthermore, the variation in brushite and monetite powders did not affect the mechanical properties of the triphasic blocks.
Collapse