Assessing bone formation on hydrophilic and hydrophobic implant surfaces in a murine model treated with bisphosphonates

Sánchez-Puetate, Julio Cesar; Silva, Bruno Luís Graciliano; Pinotti, Felipe Eduardo; Marcantonio, Camila Chierici; de Oliveira, Guilherme José Pimentel Lopes; Junior, Elcio Marcantonio; Marcantonio, Rosemary Adriana Chierici

doi:10.1007/s00784-023-05480-7

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The physicochemical alterations proposed by this type of treatment improve the wettability and hydrophilicity of the implant, enhancing adhesion and holding clot blood, favoring the beginning of the osseointegration process. 16 - 18 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of peri-implant bone tissue between hydrophilic and rough implant surfaces in spontaneously hypertensive rats treated with losartan

SANTOS,

MULINARI-SANTOS,

DE SOUZA BATISTA

et al. 2024

J. Appl. Oral Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of peri-implant bone tissue between hydrophilic and rough implant surfaces in spontaneously hypertensive rats treated with losartan

SANTOS,

MULINARI-SANTOS,

DE SOUZA BATISTA

et al. 2024

J. Appl. Oral Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Protein adsorption, cell attachment, and water interactions can all be influenced by this unsatisfied bond energy [18]. Hydrophilic surfaces are reported to enhance cell attachment [19], increase the production of osteogenic factors and osteoblast markers [20,21], and improve bone-to-implant contact [22,23] compared to hydrophobic surfaces-making quantification of surface free energy a key component in implant surface characterization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different Methods to Modify the Hydrophilicity of Titanium Implants with Biomimetic Surface Topography to Induce Variable Responses in Bone Marrow Stromal Cells

Jacobs,

Dillon,

Cohen

et al. 2024

Biomimetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The osteoblastic differentiation of bone marrow stromal cells (bMSCs), critical to the osseointegration of titanium implants, is enhanced on titanium surfaces with biomimetic topography, and this is further enhanced when the surfaces are hydrophilic. This is a result of changing the surface free energy to change protein adsorption, improving cell attachment and differentiation, and improving bone-to-implant contact in patients. In this study, we examined different methods of plasma treatment, a well-accepted method of increasing hydrophilicity, and evaluated changes in surface properties as well as the response of bMSCs in vitro. Commercially pure Ti and titanium–aluminum–vanadium (Ti6Al4V) disks were sand-blasted and acid-etched to impart microscale and nanoscale roughness, followed by treatment with various post-processing surface modification methods, including ultraviolet light (UV), dielectric barrier discharge (DBD)-generated plasma, and plasma treatment under an argon or oxygen atmosphere. Surface wettability was based on a sessile water drop measurement of contact angle; the elemental composition was analyzed using XPS, and changes in topography were characterized using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and confocal imaging. The cell response was evaluated using bMSCs; outcome measures included the production of osteogenic markers, paracrine signaling factors, and immunomodulatory cytokines. All plasma treatments were effective in inducing superhydrophilic surfaces. Small but significant increases in surface roughness were observed following UV, DBD and argon plasma treatment. No other modifications to surface topography were noted. However, the relative composition of Ti, O, and C varied with the treatment method. The cell response to these hydrophilic surfaces depended on the plasma treatment method used. DBD plasma treatment significantly enhanced the osteogenic response of the bMSCs. In contrast, the bMSC response to argon plasma-treated surfaces was varied, with an increase in OPG production but a decrease in OCN production. These results indicate that post-packaging methods that increased hydrophilicity as measured by contact angle did not change the surface free energy in the same way, and accordingly, cells responded differently. Wettability and surface chemistry alone are not enough to declare whether an implant has an improved osteogenic effect and do not fully explain how surface free energy affects cell response.

show abstract

Assessing bone formation on hydrophilic and hydrophobic implant surfaces in a murine model treated with bisphosphonates

Cited by 2 publications

References 56 publications

Analysis of peri-implant bone tissue between hydrophilic and rough implant surfaces in spontaneously hypertensive rats treated with losartan

Analysis of peri-implant bone tissue between hydrophilic and rough implant surfaces in spontaneously hypertensive rats treated with losartan

Different Methods to Modify the Hydrophilicity of Titanium Implants with Biomimetic Surface Topography to Induce Variable Responses in Bone Marrow Stromal Cells

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About