We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 25 (2010), No. 6     15. Dec. 2010
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 25 (2010), No. 6  (15.12.2010)

Page 1099-1107, PubMed:21197485


Cell Behavior Related to Implant Surfaces with Different Microstructure and Chemical Composition: An In Vitro Analysis
Conserva, Enrico / Lanuti, Anna / Menini, Maria
Purpose: This paper reports on an in vitro comparison of osteoblast and mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation related to two different surface treatments applied to the same implant design to determine whether the interaction between cells and implants is influenced by surface structure and chemical composition of the implants.
Materials and Methods: Thirty-nine implants with a sandblasted (SB) surface and 39 implants with a grit-blasted and high-temperature acid-etched (GBAE) surface were used. The implant macrostructures and microstructures were analyzed by high- and low-voltage scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and by stereo-SEM. The surface chemical composition was investigated by energy dispersive analysis and x-ray photoemission spectroscopy. SaOS-2 osteoblasts and human MSCs were used for the evaluation of cell proliferation and alkaline phosphatase enzymatic activity in contact with the two surfaces.
Results: The GBAE surface showed fewer contaminants and a very high percentage of titanium (19.7%) compared to the SB surface (14.2%). The two surfaces showed similar mean roughness (Ra), but the depth (Rz) and density (RSm) of the porosity were significantly increased in the GBAE surface. The GBAE surface presented more osteoblast and MSC proliferation than the SB surface. No statistically significant differences in alkaline phosphatase activity were found between surfaces for either cellular line.
Conclusions: The GBAE surface showed less surface contaminants and a higher percentage of titanium (19.7%) than the SB surface. The macro/micropore structured design and chemical composition of the GBAE surface allowed greater cell adhesion and proliferation and an earlier cell spreading but did not play an obvious role in in vitro cellular differentiation.

Keywords: dental implants, human mesenchymal stem cells, implant surface, SaOS-2 cells