Electrochemical study of Type 304 and 316L stainless steels in simulated body fluids and cell cultures

Yee Chin Tang, Shoji Katsuma, Shinji Fujimoto, Sachiko Hiromoto

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

101 Citations (Scopus)


The electrochemical corrosion behaviour of Type 304 and 316L stainless steels was studied in Hanks' solution, Eagle's minimum essential medium (MEM), serum containing medium (MEM with 10% of fetal bovine serum) without cells, and serum containing medium with cells over a 1-week period. Polarization resistance measurements indicated that the stainless steels were resistant to Hanks' and MEM solutions. Type 304 was more susceptible to pitting corrosion than Type 316L in Hanks' and MEM solutions. The uniform corrosion resistance of stainless steels, determined by Rp, was lower in culturing medium than in Hanks' and MEM. The low corrosion resistance was due to surface passive film with less protective to reveal high anodic dissolution rate. When cells were present, the initial corrosion resistance was low, but gradually increased after 3 days, consistent with the trend of cell coverage. The presence of cells was found to suppress the cathodic reaction, that is, oxygen reduction, and increase the uniform corrosion resistance as a consequence. On the other hand, both Type 304 and 316L stainless steels became more susceptible to pitting corrosion when they were covered with cells.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)709-715
Number of pages7
JournalActa Biomaterialia
Issue number6
Publication statusPublished - 2006 Nov
Externally publishedYes


  • Fetal bovine serum
  • In vitro corrosion studies
  • L929
  • Polarisation resistance
  • Simulated body environment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biotechnology
  • Biomaterials
  • Biochemistry
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Molecular Biology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Electrochemical study of Type 304 and 316L stainless steels in simulated body fluids and cell cultures'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this