Assessment of the Functional Properties of 316L Steel Alloy Subjected to Ion Implantation Used in Biotribological Systems

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The aim of this manuscript is to investigate the impact of ion implantation on improving the functional properties of implants surfaces, by presenting morphology, surface geometric structure and tribological test results for layers, derived from ion implantation with nitrogen and oxygen ions.

Even though the contents are rich, and the authors also give their deep insight for some works, the are aspects to be mentioned, to make the article fully readable. For these reasons, the manuscript requires minor changes.

Please find below an enumerated list of comments on my review of the manuscript:

LINE 43: For example, the oral cavity environment demonstrates corrosive properties in respect of metals, as highlighted by different studies (see, for reference: Carbon Coatings Deposited on Prosthodontic Ni-Cr Alloy – 2021). In this context, Titanium and its derived alloys, most suitable to be used in implant dentistry, present biocompatibility as well as corrosion and mechanical resistance properties (see, for reference: Microbiological and SEM-EDS Evaluation of Titanium Surfaces Exposed to Periodontal Gel: In Vitro Study – 2019; Commercial oral hygiene products and implant collar surfaces: Scanning electron microscopy observations – 2020).

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

As regards this section, the methodology design was appropriately implemented within the study.

RESULTS:

This section is well organized and densely presented, based on well-synthetized data.

To sum up, the topic is timely and call for attention. The paper is well-written and accessible, providing sufficient information for the non-expert, while also achieving a balance of detail for those with more expertise in the field. Overall, the manuscript requires minor changes (as mentioned). I would accept the manuscript, if the comments are addressed properly.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,   Thanks for all your comments.

The oral cavity environment is very demanding. Therefore, the next stage of my research will be the performance of comprehensive corrosion tests in the environment of artificial saliva.

I agree with you that titanium and its alloys are better but also more expensive compared to 316L. Therefore, we test various materials (often cheaper) and physicochemical treatments.

Reviewer 2 Report

The research articles entitled “Assessment of functional properties of Ti13Nb13Zr titanium alloy subjected to ion implantation used in biotribological systems” by Piotrowska et.al.. This research articles discuss the importance of surface modification of metallic implants and their limitations in medical use. They have developed surface modified Ti13Nb13Zr titanium alloy using ion implantation technique, and characterized the surface properties, mechanical strength, thickness of the coating layer. The experiment conducted in this research and data presented are logically explained. Moreover, this research have futuristic importance and could be potential for translational research. However, I have minor comment regarding the introduction section as well as results and discussion section for improvement before acceptance for publication. The comments are as follows:

1. Although, the introduction is written in details and discussed the current clinical limitation, metal mechanical and corrosion stability, functional properties and ion implantation method, but does not explain other techniques of metallic surface modifications such as plasma spraying, anodic oxidation, sol-gel, biomimetic coating, sputtering, electrochemical and electrophoretic deposition. Authors should briefly discuss these techniques and highlight the advantages of ion implantation techniques compare to above techniques. Some relevant Refs. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 73A (2005), 48–54, Acta Biomater. 2 (2006), 547–556. ACS Appl. Bio Mater.2019, 2, 11, 5190–5203.
2. Page 3 line 98; please provide the details of “Idonus ion implantation machine (i.e., model number, country name, etc.). Please follow this comment to other instrument details as well.
3. Page 3, line 107 and 111, “Figure” and line “Fig.”. Please consistent with one format.
4. Figure 9, why the penetration depth for nitrogen (N) ion implanted substrate showed lower depth than oxygen (O) ion implanted substrate?
5. If possible, authors are recommended to measure the water contact angle to observe the hydrophilicity of the modified surface.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, thank you for all your valuable comments. All of them have been included

1. I followed the Reviewer's suggestions
2. Unfortunately, I do not have the Idonus model number. The device used is a hardionTM model. The ion implantator is produced by the Swiss. The name of the device is included in the text of the article.
3. The note has been complied with. The figure marking was corrected in the text.
4. The results of the hardness test showed that in the case of the sample implanted with nitrogen ions, the indenter penetrated at 58.8 nm, and oxygen at 72.6 nm. It is directly related to instrumental hardness and Young's modulus. The sample implanted with nitrogen ions has a 40% higher hardness and 15% higher Young's modulus compared to the sample implanted with oxygen ions.
5.  I have tested the contact angle with distilled water (chapter 3.8)