The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지

A STUDY ON THE RESPONSES OF OSTEOBLASTS TO VARIOUS SURFACE-TREATED TITANIUM

  • Lee Joung-Min (Department of Prosthodontics, Graduated School, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim Yung-Soo (Department of Prosthodontics, Graduated School, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim Chang-Whe (Department of Prosthodontics, Graduated School, Seoul National University) ;
  • Jang Kyung-Soo (Department of Prosthodontics, Graduated School, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lim Young-Jun (Department of Prosthodontics, Graduated School, Seoul National University)
  • Published : 2004.06.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Statement of problem. The long-term success of implants is the development of a stable direct connection between bone and implant surface, which must be structural and functional. To improve a direct implant fixation to the bone, various strategies have been developed focusing on the surface of materials. Among them, altering the surface properties can modify cellular responses such as cell adhesion, cell motility and bone deposition. Purpose. This study was to evaluate the cellular behaviors on the surface-modified titanium by morphological observation, cellular proliferation and differentiation. Material and methods. Specimens were divided into five groups, depending on their surface treatment: electropolishing(EP) anoclizing(AN), machining(MA), blasting with hydroxyapatite particle(RBM) and electrical discharge machining(EDM). Physicochemical properties and microstructures of the specimens were examined and the responses of osteoblast-like cells were investigated. The microtopography of specimens was observed by scanning electron microscopy(SEM). Surface roughness was measured by a three-dimensional roughness measuring system. The microstructure was analyzed by X-ray diffractometer(XRD) and scanning auger electron microscopy(AES). To evaluate cellular responses to modified titanium surfaces, osteoblasts isolated from neonatal rat were cultured. The cellular morphology and total protein amounts of osteoblast-like cell were taken as the marker for cellular proliferation, while the expression of alkaline phosphatase was used as the early differentiation marker for osteoblast. In addition, the type I collagen production was determined to be a reliable indicator of bone matrix synthesis. Results. 1. Each prepared specimen showed specific microtopography at SEM examination. The RBM group had a rough and irregular pattern with reticulated appearance. The EDM-treated surface had evident cracks and was heterogeneous consisting of broad sheet or plate with smooth edges and clusters of small grains, deep pores or craters. 2. Surface roughness values were, from the lowest to the highest, electropolished group, anodized group, machined group, RBM group and EDM group. 3. All groups showed amorphous structures. Especially anodized group was found to have increased surface oxide thickness and EDM group had titaniumcarbide(TiC) structure. 4. Cells on electropolished, anodized and machined surfaces developed flattened cell shape and cells on RBM appeared spherical and EDM showed both. After 14 days, the cells cultured from all groups were formed to be confluent and exhibited multilayer proliferation, often overlapped or stratified. 5. Total protein amounts were formed to be quite similar among all the group at 48 hours. At 14 days, the electropolished group and the anodized group induced more total protein amount than the RBM group(P<.05). 6. There was no significant difference among five groups for alkaline phosphatase(ALP) activity at 48 hours. The AN group showed significantly higher ALP activity than any other groups at 14 days(P<.05). 7. All the groups showed similar collagen synthesis except the EDM group. The amount of collagen on the electropolished and anodized surfaces were higher than that on the EDM surface(P<.05).

Keywords

References

  1. Carlson L, Rostlund T, Albrektsson B, Albrektsson T. Removal torque for polished and rough titanium implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988;3:21-24
  2. Kasemo B, Lausmaa J. Biomaterial and implant surface: a surface science approach. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988;3:247-59
  3. Larsson C, Thomsen P, Aronsson B-O, Rodahl M, Lausmaa J, Kasemo B, Ericson LE. Bone response to surface-modified titanium implants: studies on the early tissue response to machined and electropolished implants with different oxide thicknesses. Biomaterials 1996;17:605-16 https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(96)88711-4
  4. Kasemo B. Biocompatibility of titanium implants: surface science aspects. J Prosthet Dent 1983;49:832-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(83)90359-1
  5. Baier RE, Meyer AE, Natiella JR, Carter JM. Surface properties determine bioadhesive outcomes: methods and results. J Biomed Mater Res 1984;18:337-45 https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820180404
  6. Ong JL, Raikar GN, Lucas LC, Connatser R, Gregory JC. Spectroscopic characterization of passivated titanium in a physiologic solution. J Mater Sci: Mater Med 1995;6:113-9 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00120418
  7. Klokkevold PR, Nishimura RD, Adachi M, Caputo A. Osseointegration enhanced by chemical etching of the titanium surface. Clin Oral Implant Res 1997;8:442-7 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080601.x
  8. Anselme K, Bigerelle M, Noel B, Dufresne E, Judas D, Iost A, Hardouin P. Qualitative and quantitative study of human osteoblast adhesion on materials with various surface roughness. J Biomed Mater Res 2000; 49:155-66 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(200002)49:2<155::AID-JBM2>3.0.CO;2-J
  9. Kieswetter K, Schwartz Z, Hummert TW, Cochran DL, Simpson J, Dean DD, et a1. Surface roughness modulates the local production of growth factors and cytokines by osteoblast-like MG-63 cells. J Biomed Mater Res 1996;32:55-63 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199609)32:1<55::AID-JBM7>3.0.CO;2-O
  10. Boyan BD, Batzer R, Kieswetter K, Liu Y, Cochran DL, Szmuckler-Moncler S, et a1. Titanium surface roughness alters responsiveness of MG63 osteoblast-like cells to la,25-(OH)2D3. J Biomed Mater Res 1998;39:77-85 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199801)39:1<77::AID-JBM10>3.0.CO;2-L
  11. Martin JY, Schwartz Z, Hummert TW, Schraub DM, Simpson J, Lankford J, et a1. Effect of titanium surface roughness on proliferation, differentiation, and protein synthesis of human osteoblast-like cells (MG63). J Biomed Mater Res 1995;29:389-401 https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820290314
  12. Lim YJ, Oshida Y, Andres CJ, Barco MT, Martin TB. Surface characterizations of variously treated titanium materials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:333-24
  13. Lee TM, Chang E, Yang CY. A comparison of the surface characteristics and ion release of Ti6Al4V and heattreated Ti6A14V. J Biomed Mater Res 2000;50:499-511. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(20000615)50:4<499::AID-JBM5>3.0.CO;2-U
  14. Buser D, Schenk RK, Steinemann S, Fiorellini JP, Fox CH, Stich H. Influence of surface characteristics on bone integration of titanium implants. A histomorphometric study in miniature pigs. J Biomed Mater Res 1991;25:889-902 https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820250708
  15. Gotfredsen K, Wennerberg A, Johansson C, Skovgaard LT. Hjorting-Hansen E. Anchorage of TiO2 blasted, HA-coated, and machined implants: an experimental study with rabbits. J Biomed Mater Res 1995;29:1223-31 https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820291009
  16. Cooper LF, Masuda T, Whitson SW, Yliheikkila P, Felton DA. Formation of mineralizing osteoblast cultures on machined, titanium oxide grit-blasted, and plasma-spayed titanium surface. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:37-47
  17. Ong JI, Cardens HL, cavin R, Carens DL. Osteoblast responses to BMP-2-treated titanium in vitro. Clin Oral Implants Res 1992;3:77-84. 1997;19:2219-32. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030205.x
  18. Kelleer JC, Stanford CM, Wightman JP. Draughn RA, Zaharias R. Characterizations of titanium implant surface. 1II J Biomed Mater Res 1994;28:649-54