In vitro comparison of two titanium dental implant surface treatments
In vitro comparison of two titanium dental implant surface treatments: 3M™ESPE™ MDIs versus Ankylos®
Abstract
Background
An ideal implant should have a surface that is conducive to osseointegration. In vitro cell culture studies using disks made of same materials and surface as of implants may provide useful information on the events occurring at the implant-tissue interface. In the current study, we tested the hypothesis that there is no difference in the proliferation and differentiation capacities of osteoblastic cells when cultured on titanium disks mimicking the surface of 3M™ESPE™ MDIs or standard (Ankylos®) implants.
Methods
Cells were grown on disks made of the same materials and with same surface texture as those of the original implants. Disks were sterilized and coated with 2% gelatin solution prior to the cell culture experiments. C2C12 pluripotent cells treated with 300 ng/ml bone morphogenetic protein 2 BMP-2 and a stably transfected C2C12 cell line expressing BMP2 were used as models for osteogenic cells. The Hoechst 33258-stained nuclei were counted to assay cell proliferation, while alkaline phosphatase (ALPL) immunostaining was performed to investigate osteogenic differentiation. MC3T3-E1 cells were cultured as model osteoblasts. The cells were differentiated and assayed for proliferation and metabolic activities by Hoechst 33258 staining and Alamar blue reduction assays, respectively. Additionally, cultures were stained by calcein to investigate their mineral deposition properties.
Results
Electron microscopy showed greater degree of roughness on the MDI surfaces. Nuclear counting showed significantly higher number of C2C12 cells on the MDI surface. Although immunostaining detected higher number of ALPL-positive cells, it was not significant when normalized by cell numbers. The number of MC3T3-E1 cells was also higher on the MDI surface, and accordingly, these cultures showed higher Alamar blue reduction. Finally, calcein staining revealed that the MC3T3-E1 cells grown on MDI surfaces deposited more minerals.
Conclusions
Although both implant surfaces are conducive for osteoblastic cell attachment, proliferation, and extracellular matrix mineralization, cell proliferation is higher on MDI surfaces, which may in turn facilitate osseointegration via increased ECM mineralization.
Serial posts:
- In vitro comparison of two titanium dental implant surface treatments
- Background : Comparison of two titanium dental implant surface treatments
- Methods : Comparison of two titanium dental implant surface treatments (1)
- Results : Comparison of two titanium dental implant surface treatments
- Methods : Comparison of two titanium dental implant surface treatments (2)
- Methods : Comparison of two titanium dental implant surface treatments (3)
- Discussion : Comparison of two titanium dental implant surface treatments (1)
- Discussion : Comparison of two titanium dental implant surface treatments (2)
- Discussion : Comparison of two titanium dental implant surface treatments (3)
- Figure 1. Preparation of specimens
- Figure 2. Implant surface characterization under SEM
- Figure 3. Increased proliferation of C2C12 cells grown
- Figure 4. a C2C12 cells (control) and pBMP-2-transfected C2C12 cells
- Figure 5. Florescence microscopy