In vitro study on the response of RAW264.7 and MS-5 fibroblast cells on laser-induced periodic surface structures for stainless steel alloys

RSC Advances ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (53) ◽  
pp. 42548-42558 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clare McDaniel ◽  
Olga Gladkovskaya ◽  
Aiden Flanagan ◽  
Yury Rochev ◽  
Gerard M. O'Connor
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Surface Topography ◽  
Cell Attachment ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Surface Structures ◽  
Fibroblast Cells ◽  
Steel Alloys ◽  
Periodic Surface ◽  
Stent Surface

Cell attachment and growth can be controlled by stent surface topography. In some cases fibroblast cells attach while monocytes failed on the structured surface of Pt:SS and 316LSS stents.

scholarly journals Scanning Accuracy of Bracket Features and Slot Base Angle in Different Bracket Materials by Four Intraoral Scanners: An In Vitro Study

Materials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 365
Author(s):  
Seon-Hee Shin ◽  
Hyung-Seog Yu ◽  
Jung-Yul Cha ◽  
Jae-Sung Kwon ◽  
Chung-Ju Hwang
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Sem Images ◽  
Polycrystalline Alumina ◽  
Base Angle ◽  
Accurate Expression ◽  
Dental Model ◽  
Alumina Composite ◽  
The Difference

The accurate expression of bracket prescription is important for successful orthodontic treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of digital scan images of brackets produced by four intraoral scanners (IOSs) when scanning the surface of the dental model attached with different bracket materials. Brackets made from stainless steel, polycrystalline alumina, composite, and composite/stainless steel slot were considered, which have been scanned from four different IOSs (Primescan, Trios, CS3600, and i500). SEM images were used as references. Each bracket axis was set in the reference scan image, and the axis was set identically by superimposing with the IOS image, and then only the brackets were divided and analyzed. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the differences. The difference between the manufacturer’s nominal torque and bracket slot base angle was 0.39 in SEM, 1.96 in Primescan, 2.04 in Trios, and 5.21 in CS3600 (p < 0.001). The parallelism, which is the difference between the upper and lower angles of the slot wall, was 0.48 in SEM, 7.00 in Primescan, 5.52 in Trios, 6.34 in CS3600, and 23.74 in i500 (p < 0.001). This study evaluated the accuracy of the bracket only, and it must be admitted that there is some error in recognizing slots through scanning in general.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document