Enhanced Bone Apposition to a Chemically Modified SLA Titanium Surface

Buser, Daniel; Broggini, Nina; Wieland, Marco; Schenk, Robert K.; Denzer, Alain J.; Cochran, David L.; Hoffmann, Britt; Lussi, Adrian; Steinemann, S.

doi:10.1177/154405910408300704

Cited by 1,071 publications

(1,178 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,011

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Greater bone formation is found around microstructured implant surfaces that have been modified to have high surface energy (modSLA) than around implants with the same topography but with a more hydrophobic surface (SLA) (27). In vitro, osteoblasts are more differentiated when grown on modSLA than on SLA and there is a marked increase in the prostaglandin E 2 (PGE 2 ), TGF-␤1, and OPG content of the conditioned media.…”

mentioning

confidence: 87%

Integrin α2β1 plays a critical role in osteoblast response to micron-scale surface structure and surface energy of titanium substrates

Olivares-Navarrete

Raz

Zhao

et al. 2008

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

213

182

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Efforts to improve bone response to biomaterials have focused on ligands that bind ␣5␤1 integrins. However, antibodies to ␣5␤1 reduce osteoblast proliferation but do not affect differentiation when cells are grown on titanium (Ti). ␤1-silencing blocks the differentiation stimulus of Ti microtopography, suggesting that other ␤1 partners are important. Stably ␣2-silenced MG63 human osteoblast-like cells were used to test whether ␣2␤1 specifically mediates osteoblast response to Ti surface micron-scale structure and energy. WT and ␣2-silenced MG63 cells were cultured on tissue culture polystyrene (TCPS) and Ti disks with different surface microtopographies: machined pretreatment (PT) surfaces [mean peak to valley roughness (R a) < 0.02 m], PT surfaces that were grit-blasted and acid-etched (SLA; R a ‫؍‬ 4 m), and SLA with high surface energy (modSLA). Alkaline phosphatase (ALP), ␣2 and ␤1 mRNA, but not ␣5, ␣v, ␤3, type-I collagen, or osteocalcin, increased on SLA and modSLA at 6 days. ␣2 increased at 8 days on TCPS and PT, but remained unchanged on SLA and modSLA. ␣2-protein was reduced 70% in ␣2-siRNA cells, whereas ␣5-mRNA and protein were unaffected. ␣2-knockdown blocked surface-dependent increases in ␤1 and osteocalcin and decreases in cell number and increases in ALP and local factors typical of MG63 cells grown on SLA and modSLA [e.g., prostaglandin E 2, osteoprotegerin, latent and active TGF-␤1, and stimulatory effects of 1␣,25(OH)2D3 on these parameters]. This finding indicates that ␣2␤1 signaling is required for osteoblastic differentiation caused by Ti microstructure and surface energy, suggesting that conclusions based on cell behavior on TCPS are not predictive of behavior on other substrates or the mechanisms involved.␣-2 integrin siRNA ͉ MG63 human osteoblasts ͉ titanium surface roughness T itanium (Ti) and Ti alloys are commonly used as biomaterials because their surface properties provide a biocompatible interface with peri-implant tissues. Strategies for modifying the nature of this interface frequently involve changes to the surface, thereby affecting protein adsorption, cell-substrate interactions, and tissue development (1). A common modification has been to create micron-scale and submicron scale roughness. Preclinical and clinical studies (2-12) show that these surfaces support greater bone-to-implant contact than smooth surfaces.How surface microstructure promotes an osteogenic response is an important question, because bone-forming osteoblasts preferentially colonize bone surfaces that have been preconditioned by bone-resorbing osteoclasts (13), resulting in complex micron-scale and submicron-scale morphologies (14). In vitro experiments using model surfaces indicate that migration, growth, and colony morphology of rat bone marrow cells (15) and osteoblasts (16-18) are sensitive to microstructure. These observations suggest that structural elements can modulate the spatial organization of cells and their ECM.The topography of osteoclast resorption pits in bone can be modeled by using Ti subs...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 87%

Integrin α2β1 plays a critical role in osteoblast response to micron-scale surface structure and surface energy of titanium substrates

Olivares-Navarrete

Raz

Zhao

et al. 2008

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

213

182

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been shown that the healing procedure can be further improved by additional surface modifications of the implant. For example, bone apposition and soft tissue integration were found to be effectively enhanced when a sand-blasted and acid-etched surface was generated on dental implants [3,4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microscopic view of osseointegration and functional mechanisms of implant surfaces

Han

Shen

2015

Materials Science and Engineering: C

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Argon ion beam polishing technique was applied to prepare the cross sections of implants feasible for high resolution scanning electron microscope investigation. The interfacial microstructure between newly formed bone and implants with three modified surfaces retrieved after in vivo test using three different animal models was characterized. By this approach it has become possible to directly observe early bone formation, the increase of bone density, and the evolution of bone structure. The two bone growth mechanisms, distant osteogenesis and contact osteogenesis, can also be distinguished. These direct observations give, at microscopic level, a better view of osseointegration and expound the functional mechanisms of various implant surfaces for osseointegration.

show abstract

“…Innovations in implant material, design, and surface structure improved implant stability and shortened healing periods. 1,2 Following implant placement, especially the initial interaction with proteins and cells is influenced by the implant surface. 3,4 Most implant surface treatments aim at enhancing the activity of bone-forming cells and their mediators to increase new bone formation and promote earlier osseointegration and higher secondary implant stability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review and meta‐analysis on the influence of biological implant surface coatings on periimplant bone formation

Jenny

Jauernik

Bierbaum

et al. 2016

J Biomedical Materials Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the influence of biological implant surface coatings on periimplant bone formation in comparison to an uncoated titanium reference surface in experimental large animal models. The analysis was structured according to the PRISMA criteriae. Of the1077 studies, 30 studies met the inclusion criteriae. Nineteen studies examined the bone implant contact (BIC) and were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, the mean increase in BIC for the test surfaces compared to the reference surfaces was 3.7 percentage points (pp) (95% CI -3.9-11.2, p = 0.339). Analyzing the increase in BIC for specific coated surfaces in comparison to uncoated reference surfaces, inorganic surface coatings showed a significant mean increase in BIC of 14.7 pp (95% CI 10.6-18.9, p < 0.01), extracellular matrix (ECM) surface coatings showed an increase of 10.0 pp (95% CI 4.4-15.6, p < 0.001), and peptide coatings showed a statistical trend with 7.1 pp BIC increase (95% CI -0.8-15.0, p = 0.08). In this review, no statistically significant difference could be found for growth factor surface coatings (observed difference -3.3 pp, 95% CI -16.5-9.9, p = 0.6). All analyses are exploratory in nature. The results show a statistically significant effect of inorganic and ECM coatings on periimplant bone formation. Abstract: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the influence of biological implant surface coatings on periimplant bone formation in comparison to an uncoated titanium reference surface in experimental large animal models. The analysis was structured according to the PRISMA criteriae. Of the1077 studies, 30 studies met the inclusion criteriae. Nineteen studies examined the bone implant contact (BIC) and were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, the mean increase in BIC for the test surfaces compared to the reference surfaces was 3.7 percentage points (pp) (95% CI 23.9-11.2, p 5 0.339). Analyzing the increase in BIC for specific coated surfaces in comparison to uncoated reference surfaces, inorganic surface coatings showed a significant mean increase in BIC of 14.7 pp (95% CI 10.6-18.9, p < 0.01), extracellular matrix (ECM) surface coatings showed an increase of 10.0 pp (95% CI 4.4-15.6, p < 0.001), and peptide coatings showed a statistical trend with 7.1 pp BIC increase (95% CI 20.8-15.0, p 5 0.08). In this review, no statistically significant difference could be found for growth factor surface coatings (observed difference 23.3 pp, 95% CI 216.5-9.9, p 5 0.6). All analyses are exploratory in nature. The results show a statistically significant effect of inorganic and ECM coatings on periimplant bone formation.

show abstract

Enhanced Bone Apposition to a Chemically Modified SLA Titanium Surface

Cited by 1,071 publications

References 18 publications

Integrin α2β1 plays a critical role in osteoblast response to micron-scale surface structure and surface energy of titanium substrates

Integrin α2β1 plays a critical role in osteoblast response to micron-scale surface structure and surface energy of titanium substrates

Microscopic view of osseointegration and functional mechanisms of implant surfaces

A systematic review and meta‐analysis on the influence of biological implant surface coatings on periimplant bone formation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About