Cell behavior related to implant surfaces with different microstructure and chemical composition: An in vitro analysis

International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants

Volumn 25, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 1099-1107

  Conserva, Enrico ^a   Lanuti, Anna ^b   Menini, Maria ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENOA   (Italy)

^b NONE   (Italy)

Author keywords

Dental implants; Human mesenchymal stem cells; Implant surface; SaOS 2 cells

Indexed keywords

DENTAL ALLOY; TITANIUM;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; BONE REGENERATION; CELL CULTURE; CHEMISTRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DENTAL ETCHING; HUMAN; MESENCHYMAL STEM CELL; METHODOLOGY; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; OSTEOBLAST; PHYSIOLOGY; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; SURFACE PROPERTY; TOOTH IMPLANTATION; TOOTH PROSTHESIS;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CELLS, CULTURED; DENTAL ALLOYS; DENTAL ETCHING; DENTAL IMPLANTS; DENTAL PROSTHESIS DESIGN; HUMANS; MESENCHYMAL STEM CELLS; MICROSCOPY, ELECTRON, SCANNING; OSSEOINTEGRATION; OSTEOBLASTS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; SURFACE PROPERTIES; TITANIUM;

EID: 79952266266     PISSN: 08822786     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Eisenbarth E, Velten D, Schenk-Meuser K, et al. Interactions be - tween cells and titanium surfaces. Biomol Eng 2002; 19: 243-249.
2. Le Guèhennec L, Soueidan A, Layrolle P, Amouriq Y. Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 844-854.
3. Shalabi MM, Gotermker A, Van’t Hof MA, Jansen JA, Creugers NHJ. Implant surface roughness and bone healing: A systematic review. J Dent Res 2006; 85: 496-500.
4. Ellingsen JE, Thomsen P, Lyngstadaas SP. Advances in dental implant materials and tissue regeneration. Periodontol 2006; 41: 136-156.
5. Deligianni DD, Katsala N, Ladas S, et al. Effect of surface roughness of the titanium alloy Ti-6Al-4V on human bone marrow cell response and on protein adsorption. Biomaterials 2001; 22: 1241-1251.
6. Brånemark P-I, Breine U, Adell R, Hansson BO, Lindström J, Ohlsson Å. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. 1:Experimental studies. Scand J Plastic Recostructive Surg 1969; 3: 81-100.
7. Bächle M, Kohal RJ. A systematic review of the influence of different titanium surfaces on proliferation, differentiation and protein synthesis of osteoblast-like MG63 cells. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004; 15: 683-692.
8. Bowers KT, Keller JC, Randolph BA, Wick DG, Michaels CM. Optimization of surface micromorphology for enhanced osteoblast responses in vitro. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992; 7: 302-310.
9. Martin JY, Schwartz Z, Hummert TW, 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: 389-401.
10. Dalby MJ, McCloy D, Robertson M, et al. Osteoprogenitor response to semi-ordered and random nanotopographies. Biomaterials 2006; 27: 2980-2987.
11. Le Guèhennec L, Martin F, Lopez-Heredia MA, et al. Osteoblastic cell behavior on nanostructured metal implants. Nanomed 2008; 3: 61-71.
12. Mereilles L, Curire F, Jacobsson M, Albrektsson T, Wenneberg A. The effect of chemical and nanotopographical modifications on the early stages of osseointegration. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008; 23: 641-647.
13. Mereilles L, Arvidsson A, Albrektsson T, Wenneberg A. Increased bone formation to unstable nano rough titanium implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007; 18: 326-332.
14. Mereilles L, Melin L, Peltola T, et al. Effect of hydroxyapatite and titania nanostructures on early in vivo bone response. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2008; 10: 245-254.
15. Morra M, Cassinelli C, Bruzzone G, et al. Surface chemistry effects of topographic modification of titanium dental implant surfaces. 1: Surface analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003; 18: 40-45.
16. Cassinelli C, Morra M, Bruzzone G, et al. Surface chemistry effects of topographic modification of titanium dental implant surfaces. 2: In vitro experiemnts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18: 46-52.
17. Weigl P. New prosthetic restorative features of Ankylos implant system. J Oral Implantol 2004; 30: 178-188.
18. Morra M, Cassinelli C. Evaluation of surface contamination of titanium dental implants by LV-SEM: Comparison with XPS measurements. Surf Interf Anal 1997; 25: 983-988.
19. Anselme K. Osteoblast adhesion on biomaterials. Biomaterials 2000; 21: 667-681.
20. Nagahara S, Matsuda T. Cell-substrate and cell-cell interactions differently regulate cytoskeletal and extracellular matrix protein gene expression. J Biomed Mater Res 1996; 32: 677-686.
21. Abdallah BM, Kassem M. Human mesenchymal stem cells:From basic biology to clinical applications. Gene Ther 2008; 15: 109-116.
22. Wataha IC, Sun ZL, Hanks CT, Fang DN. Effect of Ni ions on expression of intercellular adhesion molecule 1 by endothelial cells. J Biomed Mat Res 1997; 36: 145-151.
23. Kieswetter K, Schwartz Z, Hummert TW, et al. Surface roughness modu lates the local production of growth factors and cytokines by osteoblast-like MG-63 cells. J Biomed Mater Res 1996; 32: 55-63.
24. Martin JY, Dean DD, Cochran DL, Simpson J, Boyan BD, Schwartz Z. Proliferation, differentiation, and protein synthesis of human osteoblast-like cells (MG63) cultured on previously used titanium surfaces. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996; 7: 27-37.
25. Lauer G, Wiedmann-Al-Ahmad M, Otten JE, Hübner U, Schmelzeisen R, Schilli W. The titanium surface texture effects adherence and growth of human gingival keratinocytes and human maxillary osteoblast-like cells in vitro. Biomaterials 2001; 22: 2799-2809.
26. Postiglione L, Di Domenico G, Ramaglia L, et al. Behavior of SaSOS-2 cells cultured on different titanium surfaces. J Dent Res 2003; 82: 692-696.
27. Baxter LC, Frauchiger V, Textor M, Gwynn I, Richards RG. Fibroblast and osteoblast adhesion and morphology on calcium phosphate surfaces. Eur Cells Mater 2002; 4: 1-17.
28. Rosa AL, Beloti MM. Effect of cpTi surface roughness on human bone marrow cell attachment, proliferation and differentiation. Braz Dent J 2003; 14: 16-21.
29. Rosa AL, Beloti MM. Rat bone marrow cell response to titanium and titanium alloy with different surface roughness. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003; 14: 43-48.
30. Stanford CM, Keller JC, Solursh M. Bone cell expression on titanium surfaces is altered by sterilization treatments. J Dental Res 1994; 73: 38-48.
31. Vezeau PJ, Koorbusch GF, Draughn RA, Keller JC. Effects of multiple sterilization on surface characteristics and in vitro biologic responses to titanium. J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996; 54: 738-746.
32. Annunziata M, Guida L, Perillo L, Aversa R, Passaro I, Oliva A. Biological response of human bone marrow stromal cells to sandblasted titanium nitride-coated implant surfaces. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2008; 19: 3585-3591.
33. Esposito M, Hirsch JM, Lekholm U, Thomsen P. Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. (II). Etiopathogenesis. Eur J Oral Sci 1998; 106: 721-764.
34. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T, Johansson C, Andersson B. Experimental study of turned and grit-blasted screw-shaped implants with special emphasis on effects of blasting material and surface topography. Biomaterials 1996; 17: 15-22.
35. Piattelli A, Manzon L, Scarano A, Paloantonio M, Piattelli M. Histologic and morphologic analysis of the bone response to machined and sandblasted titanium implants: An experimental study in rabbit. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998; 13: 805-810.
36. Piattelli A, Degidi M, Paolantoni M, Mangano C, Scarano A. Residual aluminum oxide on the surface of titanium implants has no effect on osseointegration. Biomaterials 2003; 24: 4081-4089.
37. Sammons RL, Lumbikanonda N, Gross M, Cantzler P. Comparison of osteoblast spreading on microstructured dental implant surfaces and cell behavior in an explants model of osseointegration. A scanning electron microscopic study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005; 16: 657-666.
38. Scheideler L, Rupp F, Axmann D, Weber H, Geis-Gerstorfer J. Biocompatibility of microstructured dental implants surfaces. J Dent Res 2003;82(special issue B):1844.
39. Novaes AB, Papalexiou V, Grisi MFM, Souza SSLS, Taba M Jr, Kajiwara JK. Influence of implant microstructure on the osseointegration of immediate implants placed in periodontally infected sites. A histomorphometric study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004; 15: 34-43.
40. Wong M, Eulenberg J, Schenk R. Effect of surface topology on the osseointegration of implant materials in trabecular bone. J Biomed Mater Res 1995;1567-1575.
41. Owen TA, Aronow M, Shalhoub V, et al. Progressive development of the rat osteoblast phenotype in vitro: Reciprocal relationships in expression of genes associated with osteoblast proliferation and differentiation during formation of the bone extracellular matrix. J Cell Physiol 1990; 143: 420-430.
42. Ali SY. Mechanisms of calcification. In: Owen R, Goodfellow J, Bollough P (eds). Scientific Foundation of Orthopaedics and Traumatology. London: Heinemann, 1984:175-195.
43. Schwartz Z, Lohmann CH, Oefinger J, Bonewald LF, Dean DD, Boyan BD. Implant surface characteristics modulate differentiation behavior of cells in the osteoblastic lineage. Adv Dent Res 1999; 13: 38-48.
44. Kim MJ, Kim CW, Lim YJ, Heo SJ. Microrough titanium surface affects biologic response in MG63 osteoblast-like cells. J Biomed Mater Res 2006; 79: 1023-1032.
45. Anselme K, Bigerelle M, Noël B, et al. Qualitative and quantitative study of human osteoblast adhesion on materials with various surface roughness. J Biomed Mater Res 2000; 49: 155-166.
46. Kawahara H, Aoki H, Koike H, Soeda Y, Kawahara D, Matsuda S. No evidence to indicate topographic dependency on bone formation around cp titanium implants under masticatory loading. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2006; 17: 727-734.