Premium
Comparison of osteoblast spreading on microstructured dental implant surfaces and cell behaviour in an explant model of osseointegration
Author(s) -
Sammons Rachel L.,
Lumbikada Narong,
Gross Michael,
Cantzler Philip
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01168.x
Subject(s) - osseointegration , materials science , microstructure , biomedical engineering , microporous material , titanium , scanning electron microscope , extracellular matrix , calcification , implant , composite material , chemistry , medicine , metallurgy , pathology , surgery , biochemistry
Objectives: To compare interactions between rat calvarial osteoblasts and titanium dental implants with different microstructured surfaces. Material and methods: Seven commercially available implants were used. Surfaces included plasma‐sprayed, grit‐blasted and/or acid‐etched, smooth‐machined and anodised titanium. Two methods were used to compare cell behaviour: (1) A cell‐spreading assay in which percentages of cells at four different stages of attachment were identified by scanning electron microscopy and quantified within a 30 min attachment period. (2) Implants were placed in ‘pocket culture’ within nylon mesh sacs in contact with explanted calvarial bone fragments for 2 and 4 weeks. Results: Surfaces combining grit blasting and acid etching, of microporous topography, showed significantly enhanced rates of cell spreading in comparison with the others. Differential cell morphology was observed in both suspension assays and pocket cultures. In the latter, cells migrated onto all surfaces. Multicellular layers with extracellular matrix (ECM) were present between the layers and on the material surfaces after 2 weeks. After 4 weeks, cell layers were more consolidated, and microstructures were obscured by layers of cells and ECM. Mineralised tissue was seen in association with ECM on grit‐blasted surfaces of rough and smooth microtopography. Conclusions: The two methods provided complementary information: a rough surface of porous microstructure may enhance the rate of cell spreading. Differentiation and calcification occurred on surfaces of both rough and smooth microstructure.