Increase in the Potential of Osteoblasts to Support Bone Resorption by Osteoclasts In Vitro in Response to Roughness of Bone Surface

Matsunaga, Tatsuaki; Inoue, Hiromasa; Kojo, Tatsuro; Hatano, Kiyotoshi; Tsujisawa, Toshiyuki; Uchiyama, Choji; Uchida, Yasunari

doi:10.1007/s002239900732

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another hypothesis is that roughness modulates osteogenic differentiation through two separate ways: indirect effects on osteoblastic cells through osteoclasts and direct effects on osteoblastic cells. In this perspective, both roughness and osteoclast phenotype affect osteoblastic cell migration, spreading, and differentiation, and in turn, both roughness and osteoblastic cell differentiation affect osteoclast behavior. , In vivo, the optimized roughness for osteogenic differentiation should be the sum effect from these two (indirect and direct effects). In vitro, osteoblastic cell differentiation has shown to be optimal on microrough surfaces ( R a = 3–4 μm) compared to smooth surfaces, whereas osteoclast activity demonstrated to be higher on smooth than on microrough surfaces .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combinatorial Surface Roughness Effects on Osteoclastogenesis and Osteogenesis

Zhang

Chen

Shao

et al. 2018

ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implant surface properties are a key factor in bone responses to metallic bone implants. In view of the emerging evidence on the important role of osteoclasts in bone regeneration, we here studied how surface roughness affects osteoclastic differentiation and to what extent these osteoclasts have stimulatory effects on osteogenic differentiation of osteoprogenitor cells. For this, we induced osteoclasts derived from RAW264.7 cell line and primary mouse macrophages on titanium surfaces with different roughness (Ra 0.02–3.63 μm) and analyzed osteoclast behavior in terms of cell number, morphology, differentiation, and further anabolic effect on osteoblastic cells. Surfaces with different roughness induced the formation of osteoclasts with distinct phenotypes, based on total osteoclast numbers, morphology, size, cytoskeletal organization, nuclearity, and osteoclastic features. Furthermore, these different osteoclast phenotypes displayed differential anabolic effects toward the osteogenic differentiation of osteoblastic cells, for which the clastokine CTHRC1 was identified as a causative factor. Morphologically, osteoclast potency to stimulate osteogenic differentiation of osteoblastic cells was found to logarithmically correlate with the nuclei number per osteoclast. Our results demonstrate the existence of a combinatorial effect of surface roughness, osteoclastogenesis, and osteogenic differentiation. These insights open up a new dimension for designing and producing metallic implants by considering the implant roughness to locally regulate osseointegration through coupling osteoclastogenesis with osteogenesis.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combinatorial Surface Roughness Effects on Osteoclastogenesis and Osteogenesis

Zhang

Chen

Shao

et al. 2018

ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, topography-dependent higher resorption on rougher surfaces is described in the literature in osteoclast-like cell lines and osteoclasts generated from bone marrow [ 33 – 36 ]. Nevertheless, the effects in cultures of primary osteoclasts may be due to the presence of osteoblastic cells or stromal cells, which are well known to strongly affect osteoclastic behavior [ 34 ]. Our osteoclast cultures were generated from peripheral blood; thus, they did not contain contaminating stromal cell types.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Osteoclasts on Bone and Dentin In Vitro: Mechanism of Trail Formation and Comparison of Resorption Behavior

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main function of osteoclasts in vivo is the resorption of bone matrix, leaving behind typical resorption traces consisting of pits and trails. The mechanism of pit formation is well described, but less is known about trail formation. Pit-forming osteoclasts possess round actin rings. In this study we show that trail-forming osteoclasts have crescent-shaped actin rings and provide a model that describes the detailed mechanism. To generate a trail, the actin ring of the resorption organelle attaches with one side outside the existing trail margin. The other side of the ring attaches to the wall inside the trail, thus sealing that narrow part to be resorbed next (3–21 μm). This 3D configuration allows vertical resorption layer-by-layer from the surface to a depth in combination with horizontal cell movement. Thus, trails are not just traces of a horizontal translation of osteoclasts during resorption. Additionally, we compared osteoclastic resorption on bone and dentin since the latter is the most frequently used in vitro model and data are extrapolated to bone. Histomorphometric analyses revealed a material-dependent effect reflected by an 11-fold higher resorption area and a sevenfold higher number of pits per square centimeter on dentin compared to bone. An important material-independent aspect was reflected by comparable mean pit area (μm2) and podosome patterns. Hence, dentin promotes the generation of resorbing osteoclasts, but once resorption has started, it proceeds independently of material properties. Thus, dentin is a suitable model substrate for data acquisition as long as osteoclast generation is not part of the analyses.

show abstract

“…Adhesive materials could provide instructive cues to promote tissue repair and regeneration. [ 100–157 ] These cues can be biochemical, cellular, or mechanical. The strategies to design adhesives to match tissue mechanics have been thoroughly reviewed elsewhere.…”

Section: Design Principles Of Tissue Adhesivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multifaceted Design and Emerging Applications of Tissue Adhesives

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tissue adhesives can form appreciable adhesion with tissues and have found clinical use in a variety of medical settings such as wound closure, surgical sealants, regenerative medicine, and device attachment. The advantages of tissue adhesives include ease of implementation, rapid application, mitigation of tissue damage, and compatibility with minimally invasive procedures. The field of tissue adhesives is rapidly evolving, leading to tissue adhesives with superior mechanical properties and advanced functionality. Such adhesives enable new applications ranging from mobile health to cancer treatment. To provide guidelines for the rational design of tissue adhesives, here, existing strategies for tissue adhesives are synthesized into a multifaceted design, which comprises three design elements: the tissue, the adhesive surface, and the adhesive matrix. The mechanical, chemical, and biological considerations associated with each design element are reviewed. Throughout the report, the limitations of existing tissue adhesives and immediate opportunities for improvement are discussed. The recent progress of tissue adhesives in topical and implantable applications is highlighted, and then future directions toward next‐generation tissue adhesives are outlined. The development of tissue adhesives will fuse disciplines and make broad impacts in engineering and medicine.

show abstract

Increase in the Potential of Osteoblasts to Support Bone Resorption by Osteoclasts In Vitro in Response to Roughness of Bone Surface

Cited by 7 publications

References 20 publications

Combinatorial Surface Roughness Effects on Osteoclastogenesis and Osteogenesis

Combinatorial Surface Roughness Effects on Osteoclastogenesis and Osteogenesis

Osteoclasts on Bone and Dentin In Vitro: Mechanism of Trail Formation and Comparison of Resorption Behavior

Multifaceted Design and Emerging Applications of Tissue Adhesives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About