Bioactive glass-ceramics containing fluorapatite, xonotlite, cuspidine and wollastonite form apatite faster than their corresponding glasses.
Sci Rep 2024;
14:3997. [PMID:
38369547 PMCID:
PMC10874964 DOI:
10.1038/s41598-024-54228-0]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2023] [Accepted: 02/09/2024] [Indexed: 02/20/2024] Open
Abstract
Crystallisation of bioactive glasses has been claimed to negatively affect the ion release from bioactive glasses. Here, we compare ion release and mineralisation in Tris-HCl buffer solution for a series of glass-ceramics and their parent glasses in the system SiO2-CaO-P2O5-CaF2. Time-resolved X-ray diffraction analysis of glass-ceramic degradation, including quantification of crystal fractions by full pattern refinement, show that the glass-ceramics precipitated apatite faster than the corresponding glasses, in agreement with faster ion release from the glass-ceramics. Imaging by transmission electron microscopy and X-ray nano-computed tomography suggest that this accelerated degradation may be caused by the presence of nano-sized channels along the internal crystal/glassy matrix interfaces. In addition, the presence of crystalline fluorapatite in the glass-ceramics facilitated apatite nucleation and crystallisation during immersion. These results suggest that the popular view of bioactive glass crystallisation being a disadvantage for degradation, apatite formation and, subsequently, bioactivity may depend on the actual system study and, thus, has to be reconsidered.
Collapse