Osteoblastic and cytokine gene expression of implant‐adherent cells in humans

Abstract

Implants with superimposed nanoscale topography generate a greater induction of genes linked to osteogenesis and cell-cell signaling during the early phases of osseointegration.

Gene expression in peri‐implant crevicular fluid of smokers and nonsmokers. 1. The early phase of osseointegration

“…This is in agreement with results in experimental studies, in normal uncompromized rat model, which revealed higher early expression of bone formation and remodeling factors in cells adherent to surface‐modified implants compared to machined implants . A human study showed that implants with combined nanosurface and microsurface modification enhanced the early expression of osteogenic factors OC and osterix, in implant‐adherent cells, compared to cells adherent to micro‐rough implants . Taken together, the present and previous data suggests that different surface modifications trigger the early osteogenic differentiation in the implant‐adherent cells in bone‐implant interface zone, and, importantly, this is at least partly mirrored in the crevicular fluid around the implant.…”

Early molecular assessment of osseointegration in humans

“…(Bryington et al. ) demonstrated the influence of the presence of nanofeatures (OS) in mediating an immunomodulatory effect on macrophages by enhanced expression of IL‐9 (a Th2‐associated cytokine that reduces monocyte oxidative burst and TNF‐ α release; Pilette et al. ) and IL‐22 compared with microroughened surfaces (TiO).…”

“…(Bryington et al. ) were able to demonstrate a differential upregulation of OSX, a key transcription factor for osteoblast differentiation on the nanoscale featured implants compared with the microtopography TiOblast surface. A possible factor contributing to this difference is the age of the population included.…”

“…(Bryington et al. ) utilized qRT‐PCR to identify differential gene expression in implant adherent cells. Differences in the sensitivity of the platforms used for assessing mRNA gene expression might have contributed to the differences in the results obtained (Chuaqui et al.…”

Implant‐associated gene expression in the jaw bone of smokers and nonsmokers: A human study using quantitativeqPCR

“…Furthermore, machined implants exhibited higher marginal bone loss and were more prone to failure than oxidized implants after five years (Sayardoust et al., ). Studies in humans which addressed the genes expressed at different implant surfaces during early osseointegration (Bryington, Mendonca, Nares, & Cooper, ; Donos et al., ; Ivanovski et al., ; Thalji, Nares, & Cooper, ) revealed different patterns of expression depending on the surface of the implant (Shanbhag, Shanbhag, & Stavropoulos, ). Common to these studies was the use of a method involving miniature implants, subsequently explanted from the recipient jaw with or without the retrieval of the surrounding bone.…”