Discussion : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [2]
In a previous study, we showed that TCP induced the programmed cell death (apoptosis) in DFCs [11]. Our new study investigated therefore the induction of apoptosis in dental cells. While SB and soft materials did not induce apoptosis or cell death, AP induced obviously cell death and apoptosis in dental cells. Here, the results for dNC-PCs and DFCs were almost the same. Interestingly, neither silicone nor PA induced the apoptosis in dental cells but did not also sustain the osteogenic differentiation of dental cells. Here, the ALP activity was strongly inhibited. Although no explanation for the induction of apoptosis by AP is available, the induction of apoptosis by AP does not correlate with the induction of the osteogenic differentiation. Both bone substitute materials sustained the differentiation, but only AP induced the expression of typical osteogenic differentiation markers. The induction of both osteogenic markers and apoptosis is very similar to that of our previous studies with TCP [10,11]. Interestingly, a study with pre-differentiated human cord blood stem cells showed also very similar effects on TCP [22]. They discovered a reduced number of pre-differentiated stem cells after long term cultures on TCP [22]. But although cell numbers decreased between days 1 and 7, the gene expression of osteogenic cell differentiation markers was increased [22]. In contrast, Marino et al. demonstrated that TCP scaffolds promoted both cell proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of human adipose stem cells [23]. However, additional studies are required to disclose the molecular relationship between apoptosis and the osteogenic differentiation.
Finally, we could show that surface modifications are important for the attachment and cell proliferation of dental cells (Figure 6). Our results are in accordance to the results obtained in previous studies. For example, modifications such as fibronectin coating of TCP or composites with a combination of polymer of poly glycolic-lactic acid (PGLA) with TCP may also influence cell attachment and proliferation of seeded cells [24,25]. Moreover, Seebach et al. showed that TCP products from different suppliers differ substantially in their morphology and that surface or porous structure seems to be of importance for the cell seeding and proliferation [25]. Unfortunately, a modification of PA with collagen did not improve the osteogenic differentiation of dental stem cells.
Serial posts:
- Abstract : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions
- Background : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [1]
- Background : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [2]
- Methods : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [1]
- Methods : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [2]
- Methods : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [3]
- Methods : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [4]
- Results : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [1]
- Results : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [2]
- Discussion : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [1]
- Discussion : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [2]
- Conclusions : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions
- References : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [1]
- References : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [2]
- References : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [3]
- Acknowledgement : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions
- Author information : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [1]
- Author information : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions [2]
- Additional information : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions
- Additional file : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions
- Rights and permissions : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions
- About this article : Evaluation of implant-materials as cell carriers for dental stem cells under in vitro conditions
- Figure 1. Cell attachment on tested materials. (A) Relative cell adherence of DFCs and dNC-PCs; (B) dental cells did little adhere on PA; representative pictures of DFCs. : Evaluation of implant
- Figure 2. Cell proliferation of dNC-PCs and DFCs on tested materials. (A) and (B) Relative cell numbers; (C) spheroid cell clusters on silicone (representative pictures for DFCs); Silicone (24 and 48 h). : Evaluation of implant
- Figure 3. Evaluation of programmed cell death (apoptosis) in dental stem cells. (A) Flow cytometry analyses (for details materials and methods) show percentage of vital cells (black number), apoptotic cells (blue number), and dead cells (red number). (B) Western blot analyses show the expression of the pro-apoptotic marker BAX and the anti-apoptotic marker BCL2. : Evaluation of implant
- Figure 4. Osteogenic differentiation of dental stem cells. Normalized ALP activity of dNC-PCs and DFCs on AP and SB (A) and on silicone (B). Cells were differentiated on standard cell culture dishes for control. : Evaluation of implant
- Figure 5. Evaluation of osteogenic differentiation. (A) Clustergram of PCR-array results; (B-C) histology of differentiated dental cells on AP (B) and SB (C). Representative results are shown for dNC-PCs. : Evaluation of implant
- Figure 6. Cultivation and osteogenic differentiation of DFCs on PA after modification with collagen I. (Left) Relative cell number and (Right) normalized ALP activity. : Evaluation of implant