A study of cell behaviour on the surfaces of multifilament materials

Abstract

Since many fibres are very strong, they are considered to have useful potential for fibre reinforcement of orthopaedic and dental implant materials. Fibres exposed on the surface of composites may significantly influence the cellular response not only due to the chemistry but also due to the fibre size and shape. This study has concentrated on investigation of cellular responses to fibre-specific aspects of fibre-reinforced composites. Four multifilament materials with diameter less than 20 microm were used: Kevlar 29(K), silicon carbide(SiC), nylon 66(N), and polyethylene terephthalate(PET). Established cell line L929 fibroblasts were used as the cell model. Cell behaviour on the surfaces of fibres was examined using direct cell counting (after 3, 5, 8 h and 1, 2, 3 days), scanning electron microscopy (SEM) (after 2 h and 2 days), and fluorescent staining of F-actin, which was analysed by confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) (after 2 h and 2 days). The results showed that fibroblasts adhered and grew very well on all fibre surfaces, although less cells were observed on PET from direct cell counting. Significant orientational behaviour of cells was found on all fibre surfaces from the SEM and CLSM analysis, independent of the bulk chemistry of the fibres.

Cell behavior on laser surface-modified polyethylene terephthalatein vitro

“…This may further change the surface of the substrate and enhance cell adhesion and spreading. 2 Figure 1 shows that the fibroblast cells appeared to be attached and extended their filopodia on the surface of CO 2 laser-treated PET with three pulses, whereas, during the same culturing period, the fibroblast cells on the unmodified PET were in an early stage of attachment and almost round. The difference between cell appearances is likely to be a function of surface chemistry and surface morphology.…”

“…1 A large number of groups have studied the interaction of biomedical materials with cultured cells because cell compatible materials are thought to be very important in many biomedical applications. [2][3][4][5] The control of cell adhesion to synthetic polymers is also a key factor in tissue engineering, which rests on the ability to direct specific cell types to proliferate, migrate, and express physiological behaviors in order to support and stimulate cellular architecture and tissue reconstraction. [6][7][8] Numerous in vitro experiments have shown that the cell behavior is influenced by the physicochemical properties of polymer surfaces such as wettability, chemistry, charge, roughness and rigidity.…”

“…18 It has been recognized that features of the surface morphology in dimensions around a micrometer may influence the host response by virtue of physical rather than chemical or mechanical mechanism. 2 Moreover, laser irradiation can induce photochemical reactions to the formation of new chemical species, which could in turn improve the interactions between the surface and the biological medium. 19,20 In previous works, we showed that the laser irradiation caused some changes in morphology, wettability, crystallinity, and chemical composition of the polyethylene terephthalate (PET) surface.…”

Electrospun nanofibrous structure: A novel scaffold for tissue engineering

“…The dimensions of the building components of a scaffold are important factors in regulating cell activities. 16,17 Cell behavior is known to be regulated by the physical properties of an engineered scaffold, such as the architecture and topography. Previous studies have shown that cell proliferation is influenced by the architectural scale of the structure and that adhesion is affected by the topography of the material.…”

Structural and Surface Compatibility Study of Modified Electrospun Poly(ε-caprolactone) (PCL) Composites for Skin Tissue Engineering

“…Thus, it is important to investigate how surface chemistry and structural unit of hybrid/composite scaffold can influence the cell transplantation process towards generation of new tissue or organ (37)(38)(39).…”