Adhesive and oxidative response of stem cell and pre‐osteoblasts on titanium and zirconia surfaces in vitro

Abstract

Aim:The aim of the present study was to investigate the initial stem cell and preosteoblast cell adhesion and oxidative response on zirconia in comparison with titanium.Methods: Human dental pulp stem cells (DPSC) and murine pre-osteoblasts (MC3T3-E1) cells were cultured on zirconia and titanium surfaces, and at 3-, 12-, and 24-hour intervals, cell viability and morphology were determined with tetrazolium based colorimetric assay, scanning electron microscopy, and immunofluorescence analysis. The in situ reactive oxygen species level of both cells on each material surface was examined after 24-hour culture. Results: Both DPSC and MC3T3-E1 cells revealed comparable morphological features during 24-hour cell adhesion processes, with cells continued expanding of cell size and increasing of cell viability on titanium and zirconia surfaces during 24-hour culture. Zirconia demonstrated relatively higher mean cell viability compared to titanium within 24-hour culture, with significantly higher DPSC viability at 12 hours after seeding (P < 0.05). Relatively higher mean reactive oxygen species levels in both DPSC and MC3T3E1 were found on zirconia surfaces after 24-hour culture compared to titanium. Conclusions:From the results, zirconia as a potential dental implant substrate demonstrated equivalent or better initial cellular responses compared to titanium. K E Y W O R D Scell adhesion, dental implant, reactive oxygen species, titanium, zirconia

Prosthetic Materials Used for Implant-Supported Restorations and Their Biochemical Oral Interactions: A Narrative Review

“…Back in 1976, the study conducted by Styles et al [ 112 ] highlighted the fact that zirconia did not induce cytotoxicity in soft tissues. More recent studies pointed out that no systemic or local adverse reactions produced by zirconia (no matter the tested structural form) have been reported, as presented in Table 1 [ 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 ].…”

“…The zirconia biocompatibility was evaluated in vitro by monitoring different cell culture interactions with the biomaterial [ 115 , 120 ]. In a recent study, conducted by Wei et al, murine pre-osteoblasts cells and human dental pulp stem cells were cultured on zirconia and titanium surfaces [ 121 ]. The cell viability and morphology were evaluated at 3, 12, and 24 h from seeding [ 121 ].…”

“…In a recent study, conducted by Wei et al, murine pre-osteoblasts cells and human dental pulp stem cells were cultured on zirconia and titanium surfaces [ 121 ]. The cell viability and morphology were evaluated at 3, 12, and 24 h from seeding [ 121 ]. Intracellular ROS levels of both cell types were determined 24 h after seeding [ 121 ].…”

“…The cell viability and morphology were evaluated at 3, 12, and 24 h from seeding [ 121 ]. Intracellular ROS levels of both cell types were determined 24 h after seeding [ 121 ]. The zirconia samples revealed a significantly higher human dental pulp stem cell viability after 12 h from seeding ( p < 0.05), compared to titanium samples [ 121 ].…”

“…Intracellular ROS levels of both cell types were determined 24 h after seeding [ 121 ]. The zirconia samples revealed a significantly higher human dental pulp stem cell viability after 12 h from seeding ( p < 0.05), compared to titanium samples [ 121 ]. Moreover, both cell types cultured on zirconia showed relatively higher mean ROS levels, 24 h after seeding, compared to titanium [ 121 ].…”