Differential response of Staphylococci and osteoblasts to varying titanium surface roughness

Biomaterials

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 951-960

  Wu, Yong ^a   Zitelli, Joseph P ^b   TenHuisen, Kevor S ^b   Yu, Xiaojun ^a   Libera, Matthew R ^a  

^a Stevens Institute of Technology   (United States)

^b STRYKER ORTHOPAEDICS   (United States)

Author keywords

Bacteria; Infection; Knee replacement; Osteoblast; Surface topography; Titanium

Indexed keywords

BIOCHEMICAL ASSAY; CONTROL LOADS; DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSE; EPIDERMIDIS; GRIT-BLASTED SURFACES; HUMAN OSTEOBLAST; IMPLANT FAILURES; IN-VITRO; INFECTION; KNEE REPLACEMENT; LATERAL LENGTH; LENGTH SCALE; MATRIX FORMATION; ORTHOPAEDIC IMPLANTS; OSSEOINTEGRATION; RELATIVE IMPORTANCE; ROUGHNESS PARAMETERS; SPRAYED SURFACE; STAPHYLOCOCCUS EPIDERMIDIS; SURFACE INTERACTIONS; TITANIUM SURFACES;

BACTERIOLOGY; BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS; BIOMATERIALS; BONE; JOINT PROSTHESES; METAL ANALYSIS; OSTEOBLASTS; PLASMA SPRAYING; PLASMAS; SILK; SURFACE PROPERTIES; TITANIUM; TOPOGRAPHY;

SURFACE ROUGHNESS;

ALKALINE PHOSPHATASE; CALCIUM; TITANIUM;

ARTICLE; BACTERIAL COLONIZATION; BACTERIAL GROWTH; BACTERIUM ADHERENCE; BIOASSAY; BONE REGENERATION; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL INTERACTION; CELL PROLIFERATION; CELL SIZE; CELL STRUCTURE; CELL VIABILITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; ENZYME ACTIVITY; FETUS; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; IN VITRO STUDY; METAL IMPLANTATION; NONHUMAN; OSTEOBLAST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STAPHYLOCOCCUS EPIDERMIDIS; SURFACE PROPERTY;

BIOCOMPATIBLE MATERIALS; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL PROLIFERATION; CELLS, CULTURED; HUMANS; MATERIALS TESTING; MICROSCOPY, ATOMIC FORCE; MICROSCOPY, ELECTRON, SCANNING; OSSEOINTEGRATION; OSTEOBLASTS; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; PROSTHESIS-RELATED INFECTIONS; STAPHYLOCOCCUS; SURFACE PROPERTIES; TITANIUM;

STAPHYLOCOCCUS; STAPHYLOCOCCUS EPIDERMIDIS;

EID: 78649447458     PISSN: 01429612     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.10.001     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Schuler M., Trentin D., Textor M., Tosatti S.G. Biomedical interfaces: titanium surface technology for implants and cell carriers. Nanomedicine (Lond) 2006, 1(4):449-463.
2. Puleo D.A., Nanci A. Understanding and controlling the bone-implant interface. Biomaterials 1999, 20(23-24):2311-2321.
3. Gristina A.G. Biomaterial-centered infection: microbial adhesion versus tissue integration. Science 1987, 237(4822):1588-1595.
4. Subbiahdoss G., Kuijer R., Grijpma D.W., van der Mei H.C., Busscher H.J. Microbial biofilm growth vs. tissue integration: "the race for the surface" experimentally studied. Acta Biomater 2009, 5(5):1399-1404.
5. Maddikeri R.R., Tosatti S., Schuler M., Chessari S., Textor M., Richards R.G., et al. Reduced medical infection related bacterial strains adhesion on bioactive RGD modified titanium surfaces: a first step toward cell selective surfaces. J Biomed Mater Res A 2008, 84(2):425-435.
6. Bauer T.W., Schils J. The pathology of total joint arthroplasty.II. Mechanisms of implant failure. Skeletal Radiol 1999, 28(9):483-497.
7. Campoccia D., Montanaro L., Arciola C.R. The significance of infection related to orthopedic devices and issues of antibiotic resistance. Biomaterials 2006, 27(11):2331-2339.
8. US markets for large-joint reconstructive implants 2008. Millenium Res Group 2008.
9. Wall I., Donos N., Carlqvist K., Jones F., Brett P. Modified titanium surfaces promote accelerated osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stromal cells in vitro. Bone 2009, 45(1):17-26.
10. Price R.L., Ellison K., Haberstroh K.M., Webster T.J. Nanometer surface roughness increases select osteoblast adhesion on carbon nanofiber compacts. J Biomed Mater Res A 2004, 70(1):129-138.
11. Borsari V., Giavaresi G., Fini M., Torricelli P., Tschon M., Chiesa R., et al. Comparative in vitro study on a ultra-high roughness and dense titanium coating. Biomaterials 2005, 26(24):4948-4955.
12. Le Guehennec L., Lopez-Heredia M.A., Enkel B., Weiss P., Amouriq Y., Layrolle P. Osteoblastic cell behaviour on different titanium implant surfaces. Acta Biomater 2008, 4(3):535-543.
13. Schwartz Z., Olivares-Navarrete R., Wieland M., Cochran D.L., Boyan B.D. Mechanisms regulating increased production of osteoprotegerin by osteoblasts cultured on microstructured titanium surfaces. Biomaterials 2009, 30(20):3390-3396.
14. Borsari V., Giavaresi G., Fini M., Torricelli P., Salito A., Chiesa R., et al. Physical characterization of different-roughness titanium surfaces, with and without hydroxyapatite coating, and their effect on human osteoblast-like cells. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2005, 75(2):359-368.
15. Jager M., Zilkens C., Zanger K., Krauspe R. Significance of nano- and microtopography for cell-surface interactions in orthopaedic implants. J Biomed Biotechnol 2007, 2007(8):69036.
16. Stevens M.M., George J.H. Exploring and engineering the cell surface interface. Science 2005, 310(5751):1135-1138.
17. Francois P., Vaudaux P., Taborelli M., Tonetti M., Lew D.P., Descouts P. Influence of surface treatments developed for oral implants on the physical and biological properties of titanium. (II) Adsorption isotherms and biological activity of immobilized fibronectin. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997, 8(3):217-225.
18. Esposito M., Hirsch J.M., Lekholm U., Thomsen P. Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. (II). Etiopathogenesis Eur J Oral Sci 1998, 106(3):721-764.
19. Arnold J.W., Boothe D.H., Bailey G.W. Parameters of treated stainless steel surfaces important for resistance to bacterial contamination. Trans Am Soc Agric Engineers 2001, 44(2):347-356.
20. Bollen C.M., Papaioanno W., Van Eldere J., Schepers E., Quirynen M., van Steenberghe D. The influence of abutment surface roughness on plaque accumulation and peri-implant mucositis. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996, 7(3):201-211.
21. Harris L.G., Richards R.G. Staphylococci and implant surfaces: a review. Injury 2006, 37(Suppl. 2).
22. Webster T.J., Siegel R.W., Bizios R. Nanoceramic surface roughness enhances osteoblast and osteoclast functions for improved orthopaedic/dental implant efficacy. Scripta Materialia 2001, 44(8-9):1639-1642.
23. Silva T.S., Machado D.C., Viezzer C., Silva Junior A.N., Oliveira M.G. Effect of titanium surface roughness on human bone marrow cell proliferation and differentiation: an experimental study. Acta Cir Bras 2009, 24(3):200-205.
24. Khang D., Lu J., Yao C., Haberstroh K.M., Webster T.J. The role of nanometer and sub-micron surface features on vascular and bone cell adhesion on titanium. Biomaterials 2008, 29(8):970-983.
25. Barbour M.E., O'Sullivan D.J., Jenkinson H.F., Jagger D.C. The effects of polishing methods on surface morphology, roughness and bacterial colonisation of titanium abutments. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2007, 18(7):1439-1447.
26. Mitik-Dineva N., Wang J., Truong V.K., Stoddart P., Malherbe F., Crawford R.J., et al. Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus aureus attachment patterns on glass surfaces with nanoscale roughness. Curr Microbiol 2009, 58(3):268-273.
27. Puckett S.D., Taylor E., Raimondo T., Webster T.J. The relationship between the nanostructure of titanium surfaces and bacterial attachment. Biomaterials 2010, 31(4):706-713.
28. Harris L.G., Mead L., Muller-Oberlander E., Richards R.G. Bacteria and cell cytocompatibility studies on coated medical grade titanium surfaces. J Biomed Mater Res A 2006, 78(1):50-58.
29. Subbiahdoss G., Grijpma D.W., van der Mei H.C., Busscher H.J., Kuijer R. Microbial biofilm growth versus tissue integration on biomaterials with different wettabilities and a polymer-brush coating. J Biomed Mater Res A 2010, 94(2):533-538.
30. Subbiahdoss G., Pidhatika B., Coullerez G., Charnley M., Kuijer R., van der Mei H.C., et al. Bacterial biofilm formation versus mammalian cell growth on titanium-based mono- and bi-functional coating. Eur Cell Mater 2010, 19:205-213.
31. Kaplan J.B., Ragunath C., Velliyagounder K., Fine D.H., Ramasubbu N. Enzymatic detachment of Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004, 48:2633-2636.
32. Whitehead K.A., Colligon J., Verran J. Retention of microbial cells in substratum surface features of micrometer and sub-micrometer dimensions. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 2005, 41(2-3):129-138.
33. Pitt W.G., McBride M.O., Barton A.J., Sagers R.D. Air-water interface displaces adsorbed bacteria. Biomaterials 1993, 14(8):605-608.
34. Moriarty T.F., Schlegel U., Perren S., Richards R.G. Infection in fracture fixation: can we influence infection rates through implant design?. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2010, 21(3):1031-1035.
35. Perla V., Webster T.J. Better osteoblast adhesion on nanoparticulate selenium- A promising orthopedic implant material. J Biomed Mater Res A 2005, 75(2):356-364.
36. Scardino A.J., Hudleston D., Peng Z., Paul N.A., de Nys R. Biomimetic characterisation of key surface parameters for the development of fouling resistant materials. Biofouling 2009, 25(1):83-93.
37. Whitehead K.A., Verran J. The effect of surface topography on the retention of microorganisms. Food Bioproducts Process 2006, 84(4 C):253-259.
38. Scardino A.J., Harvey E., De Nys R. Testing attachment point theory: diatom attachment on microtextured polyimide biomimics. Biofouling 2006, 22(1-2):55-60.
39. Riedewald F. Bacterial adhesion to surfaces: the influence of surface roughness. PDA J Pharm Sci Technol 2006, 60(3):164-171.
40. Krsko P., Kaplan J.B., Libera M. Spatially controlled bacterial adhesion using surface-patterned poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels. Acta Biomater 2009, 5(2):589-596.
41. Nebe J.G., Luethen F., Lange R., Beck U. Interface interactions of osteoblasts with structured titanium and the correlation between physicochemical characteristics and cell biological parameters. Macromol Biosci 2007, 7(5):567-578.
42. Anselme K. Osteoblast adhesion on biomaterials. Biomaterials 2000, 21(7):667-681.
43. Anselme K., Bigerelle M., Noel B., Iost A., Hardouin P. Effect of grooved titanium substratum on human osteoblastic cell growth. J Biomed Mater Res 2002, 60(4):529-540.
44. Porter R.M., Huckle W.R., Goldstein A.S. Effect of dexamethasone withdrawal on osteoblastic differentiation of bone marrow stromal cells. J Cell Biochem 2003, 90(1):13-22.
45. Wang J., Valmikinathan C.M., Liu W., Laurencin C.T., Yu X. Spiral-structured, nanofibrous, 3D scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res A 2009, 93(2):753-762.
46. Zhao G., Raines A.L., Wieland M., Schwartz Z., Boyan B.D. Requirement for both micron- and submicron scale structure for synergistic responses of osteoblasts to substrate surface energy and topography. Biomaterials 2007, 28(18):2821-2829.
47. Martin J.Y., Schwartz Z., Hummert T.W., Schraub D.M., Simpson J., Lankford J., et al. Effect of titanium surface roughness on proliferation, differentiation, and protein synthesis of human osteoblast-like cells (MG63). J Biomed Mater Res 1995, 29(3):389-401.
48. Park J.W., Kim Y.J., Park C.H., Lee D.H., Ko Y.G., Jang J.H., et al. Enhanced osteoblast response to an equal channel angular pressing-processed pure titanium substrate with microrough surface topography. Acta Biomater 2009, 5(8):3272-3280.
49. Boyan B.D., Bonewald L.F., Paschalis E.P., Lohmann C.H., Rosser J., Cochran D.L., et al. Osteoblast-mediated mineral deposition in culture is dependent on surface microtopography. Calcif Tissue Int 2002, 71(6):519-529.
50. Kim M.J., Choi M.U., Kim C.W. Activation of phospholipase D1 by surface roughness of titanium in MG63 osteoblast-like cell. Biomaterials 2006, 27(32):5502-5511.
51. Justesen J., Lorentzen M., Andersen L.K., Hansen O., Chevallier J., Modin C., et al. Spatial and temporal changes in the morphology of preosteoblastic cells seeded on microstructured tantalum surfaces. J Biomed Mater Res A 2009, 89(4):885-894.