our online journals are moving. The new (and old) issues of all journals can be found at
In most cases you can log in there directly with your e-mail address and your current password. Otherwise we ask you to register again. Thank you very much.
Your Quintessence Publishing House
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 32 (2017), No. 6 21. Nov. 2017
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 32 (2017), No. 6 (21.11.2017)
Page 1231-1240, doi:10.11607/jomi.5395, PubMed:28518180
The Effects of Laser with Different Parameters and Crosshatching on Fibroblast Adhesion and Proliferation to Implant Surfaces
Çelebi, Hakki / Arpacı, Pembegül Uyar / Çelik, Ilhami / Akman, Serhan
Purpose: To compare the adhesion and proliferation effect of HGF-1 cells on pure titanium disks when the surfaces are unprocessed (machined surfaces after slicing) or modified with a laser.
Materials and Methods: Twenty-eight titanium disks were divided into four groups. Three surface topographies were created using an erbium fiber laser: group 1 (unidirectional application [no crosshatch]), group 2 (crosshatching in two directions), and group 3 (crosshatching in three directions). The samples in group 4 were unprocessed and served as controls. The surface roughness of samples was investigated with scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and measured with a mechanical surface profilometer. HGF-1 cell line was used to analyze the adhesion of fibroblasts on the sample surfaces. The authors used SEM, XTT, and acridine orange tests to determine the adhesion of HGF-1 onto specimen surfaces and the cell morphology after incubation for 72 hours. XTT results and surface roughness values for all specimens were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test.
Results: Ra values of group 1 to group 4 (control) were 1.13, 0.26, 0.38, and 0.19, respectively. Crosshatching decreased the surface roughness values compared with unidirectional application (P = .003). Cell morphology observed in SEM showed that the elongation direction of cells resulted in all directions related with additional filopodia extentions within the crosshatch groups. Therefore, the highest cell viability was also detected in the three-directional crosshatch group (group 3) (P = .000) in XTT assay. According to the acridine orange test, higher cell numbers were seen in group 3, similar to the XTT findings (P = .86).
Conclusion: Crosshatching significantly increased the cell-covered implant surfaces compared with the unidirectional group. Decreasing the surface Ra values via crosshatching helped spread the fibroblast over the implants in any direction, thus increasing cell proliferation and adhesion.
Keywords: electron microscope tomography, lasers, titanium