Human osteoblast-like cells (MG63) proliferate on a bioactive glass surface

Abstract

Bioglass, a resorbable glass, previously has been evaluated as a bone graft substitute using cells of animal origin. Limited information is available on its effect on human cells. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that Bioglass supports viability and proliferation of human bone cells. As a prototype of human bone cells, the osteoblast cell line MG63 was used and propagated on Bioglass disks. MG63 cells also were seeded onto disks made of titanium (Ti-6Al-4V) and of cobalt chrome (Co-Cr-Mo) alloys. The number of viable cells recovered was similar for Bioglass, titanium, and polystyrene control surfaces. Significantly fewer cells were recovered from CoCr (P < 0.05) compared to Bioglass, Ti-6 Al-4v, and polystyrene surfaces. The proportion of cells undergoing DNA synthesis, estimated by thymidine uptake, was significantly greater on Bioglass and titanium surfaces (P < 0.05) than on the CoCr surface. There were detectable differences in cell morphology on these biomaterials. Functional capacity was tested by assay of osteocalcin production and no differences were detectable among the different biomaterials. This study supports the hypothesis that 45S5 Bioglass provides a favorable environment for human osteoblast proliferation and function. Bioglass may have clinical potential as a bone graft substitute, a bioactive grout, or an implant coating for promoting bony ingrowth in uncemented prostheses.

Bone defect regeneration with bioactive glass implantation in rats

“…Therefore, as to the adhesion and close contact between osteoblasts, bioactivity should be considered crucial to the development of new bases for bone tissue bioengineering. Its use in medical and dental areas, due to the excellent biocompatibility and its physical and chemical properties, has encouraged studies on the feasibility of implant coating, so as to obtain better biologic fixation, and also as a carrier of osteoinductive substances, such as bone morphogenetic proteins and other growth factors (Keeting, et al 10 , 1992; Price, et al 19 , 1997; Hamadouche, Sedel 5 , 2000). Turunen, et al 24 , 1997, also demonstrated the effectiveness of bioactive glass, as they improved the osseointegration of coated implants, provided better bone support, and presented increased stability when compared to machined implants.…”

Behaviour of moderately differentiated osteoblast-like cells cultured in contact with bioactive glasses

“…One of its approaches is the use of material matrices as tem-plates for tissue growth in vitro (Loty et al 2001;ElGhannam et al, 1995;Ducheyne et al, 1994). Once again, bioactive glasses seem to find their place, for they fulfill most of the criteria required for a suitable scaffold to support bone tissue growth, since they are known to enhance proliferation and prevent de-differentiation of osteoblast in vitro (Price et al, 1997;El-Ghannam et al, 1997a,b;Vrouwenvelder et al, 1992;Matsuda and Davies, 1987).…”

“…However, this high bioactivity index could result in a rapid pH shift of the culture medium in vitro that may be unfavorable for cellular metabolism. Therefore, in an attempt to optimize in vitro desirable biological effects, different assays of surface conditioning have been performed prior to the seeding of cells (Xynos et al, 2000;Price et al, 1997;El-Ghannam et al, 1995;1997a,b;Ducheyne et al, 1994). Although the osteogenic stimulatory effects of BG are well documented, the biological mechanisms that mediate these effects are still largely unknown.…”

In VitroEnhancement of SAOS-2 Cell Calcified Matrix Deposition onto Radio Frequency Magnetron Sputtered Bioglass-Coated Titanium Scaffolds

“…Bioactive glasses are known to enhance proliferation and downward dedifferentiation of osteoblasts in vitro. [21][22][23] Bioglasses and glass ceramics are composed of multicomponent oxide systems, for example, (Na 2 O)-CaO-SiO 2 -P 2 O 5 , which easily react with the body fluids to form a calcium phosphate layer. 24,25 This layer, which progressively crystallizes into HA, is structurally very similar to the apatite present in the bone and forms a more stable interface with the bone tissue with respect to the synthetic HA.…”