Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jun 7;25(1):940.
doi: 10.1186/s12903-025-06305-7.

Effects of surface treatments on the adhesion strengths between polyether ether ketone and both composite resins and poly(methyl methacrylate)

Affiliations

Effects of surface treatments on the adhesion strengths between polyether ether ketone and both composite resins and poly(methyl methacrylate)

Yongcheng Ge et al. BMC Oral Health. .

Abstract

Background: This study evaluated the effects of three surface treatments-concentrated H2SO4, sodium borohydride (NaBH4), and their combination-on the shear bond strengths between polyether ether ketone (PEEK) and both composite resins and poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA).

Methods: PEEK specimens (n = 160) were randomly assigned to composite resin and PMMA groups, each of which was subdivided into normal and aging groups (n = 40), each comprising samples that were pristine (untreated) or treated with dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), NaBH4, or concentrated H2SO4 or sequentially treated with NaBH4 and concentrated H2SO4 (n = 8). The shear bond strength (SBS) of the normal and aged specimens were measured. For the normal and treated specimens, the surface and cross-sectional morphologies were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), the chemical bond modifications were investigated using X-ray photoelectron and attenuated total reflectance Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopies (XPS and ATR-FTIR, respectively), the mechanical strengths were measured using three-point bending tests, and the cytotoxicities were evaluated using cell-counting kit-8 (CCK-8) assays and 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) staining.

Results: NaBH4 etched the PEEK surface, generating a fibrous texture, while concentrated H2SO4 produced a surface possessing variously sized pores. Sequential treatment with NaBH4 and concentrated H2SO4 produced dense, permeating pores. XPS confirmed that NaBH4 reduced carbonyl groups to hydroxyl groups on the PEEK surface. ATR-FTIR spectroscopy confirmed that the silane coupling agent grafted onto the PEEK surface, forming Si-O-C bonds. NaBH4 and concentrated H2SO4 both strengthened the shear bonding between the PEEK and both the composite resins and PMMA (P < 0.05). The specimens sequentially treated with NaBH4 and 98% concentrated H2SO4 possessed the strongest shear bonding (P < 0.05). The aged specimens sequentially treated with NaBH4 and concentrated H2SO4 retained very strong shear bonds. CCK-8 cytotoxicity assays and DAPI staining confirmed that these surface treatments meet oral biocompatibility standards.

Conclusion: NaBH4 introduced chemical bonds to the PEEK surface, while concentrated-H2SO4-induced sulfonation enhanced the micromechanical interlocking between the PEEK and both the composite resins and PMMA. These combined physicochemical modifications significantly strengthened the adhesion between the PEEK and both the composite resins and PMMA and effectively strengthened PEEK's bonding.

Keywords: Composite resin; Poly(methyl methacrylate); Polyether ether ketone; SOdium Borohydride; Shear bond strength; Sulfonation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Schematic diagram of this study
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Shear Bond Strength Bonding Specimen Preparation Process. a Specimen placed on the central bottom of the mold; b Pouring superhard gypsum; c PTFE bonding mold; d Bonding resin rod to the PEEK specimen surface; e Finished bonding specimen; f Shear bond strength testing of the bonding specimen
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Bonding specimen failure mode diagram
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
SEM images of PEEK specimens after surface treatment by five methods (a) SEM of P-PEEK, b SEM of D-PEEK, c SEM of B-PEEK, d SEM of S-PEEK, e SEM of SB-PEEK
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Cross-sectional SEM images of PEEK specimens after surface treatment by five methods (a) cross-sectional SEM of P-PEEK, b cross-sectional SEM of D-PEEK, c cross-sectional SEM of B-PEEK, d cross-sectional SEM of S-PEEK, e cross-sectional SEM of SB-PEEK
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
XPS spectra of PEEK specimens after surface treatments (a-e) represent the C1 spectra of P-PEEK, D-PEEK, B-PEEK, S-PEEK, and SB-PEEK, f-j represent the O1 spectra of the same specimens
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
ATR-FTIR spectra of PEEK specimens treated with a silane coupling agent (a) P-PEEK ATR-FTIR, b D-PEEK ATR-FTIR, c B-PEEK ATR-FTIR, d S-PEEK ATR-FTIR, e SB-PEEK ATR-FTIR
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Three-point bending test results of PEEK specimens treated by five methods
Fig. 9
Fig. 9
Shear bond strength between PEEK and composite resin, and PEEK and PMMA (a) Shear bond strength between PEEK and composite resin; b Shear bond strength between PEEK and PMMA
Fig. 10
Fig. 10
Shear bond strength between PEEK and composite resin, and PEEK and PMMA after aging (a) Shear bond strength between PEEK and composite resin; Shear bond strength between PEEK and PMMA
Fig. 11
Fig. 11
Distribution of shear bond strength failure modes between PEEK and composite resin, and PEEK and PMMA (a) Shear bond strength failure mode distribution between PEEK and composite resin; b Shear bond strength failure mode distribution between PEEK and PMMA)
Fig. 12
Fig. 12
CCK-8 cytotoxicity results for PEEK specimens treated by five methods after 1 day, 4 days, and 7 days
Fig. 13
Fig. 13
DAPI staining results for PEEK specimens treated by five methods
Fig. 14
Fig. 14
Schematic of silane coupling between PEEK and both composite resins and PMMA

Similar articles

References

    1. Zol SM, Alauddin MS, Said Z, Mohd Ghazali MI, Hao-Ern L, Mohd Farid DA, Zahari NAH, Al-Khadim AHA, Abdul Aziz AH. Description of poly(aryl-ether-ketone) materials (PAEKs), polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) for application as a dental material: a materials science review. Polymers (Basel). 2023;15(9):2170. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gama LT, Bezerra AP, Schimmel M, Rodrigues Garcia RCM, de Luca CG, Gonçalves T. Clinical performance of polymer frameworks in dental prostheses: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2024;131(4):579–90. - PubMed
    1. Chokaree P, Poovarodom P, Chaijareenont P, Yavirach A, Rungsiyakull P. Biomaterials and clinical applications of customized healing abutment-a narrative review. J Funct Biomater. 2022;13(4):291. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wang L, Yang C, Sun C, Yan X, He J, Shi C, Liu C, Li D, Jiang T, Huang L. Fused deposition modeling PEEK implants for personalized surgical application: from clinical need to biofabrication. Int J Bioprint. 2022;8(4):615. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Valenti C, Federici MI, Coniglio M, Betti P, Pancrazi GP, Tulli O, Masciotti F, Nanussi A, Pagano S. Mechanical and biological properties of polymer materials for oral appliances produced with additive 3D printing and subtractive CAD-CAM techniques compared to conventional methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2024;28(7):396. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources