Fibroblasts and osteoblasts behavior after contact with different titanium surfaces used as implant abutment: An in vitro experimental study
José Henrique Cavalcanti de Lima,
Patricia Cristina Matos Robbs,
Elena Mavropoulos Oliveira Tude,
Piedad N. De Aza,
Eleani Maria da Costa,
Antonio Scarano,
Juan Carlos Prados-Frutos,
Gustavo Vicentis Oliveira Fernandes,
Sergio Alexandre Gehrke
Affiliations
José Henrique Cavalcanti de Lima
Post-graduate Program in Implant Dentistry, Centro Carioca de Reabilitação Oral, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Patricia Cristina Matos Robbs
Post-graduate Program in Implant Dentistry, Centro Carioca de Reabilitação Oral, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Elena Mavropoulos Oliveira Tude
Bioceramics and Cell Culture Lab, Brazilian Center for Physics Research-CBPF/MCTI, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Piedad N. De Aza
Instituto de Bioingenieria, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Elche, Alicante, Spain
Eleani Maria da Costa
Department of Materials Engineering, Pontificial Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
Antonio Scarano
Department of Innovative Technologies in Medicine & Dentistry, University of Chieti-Pescara, 66100, Chieti, Italy
Juan Carlos Prados-Frutos
Department of Medicine and Surgery, Faculty of Health Sciences, Rey Juan Carlos University, Madrid, Spain
Gustavo Vicentis Oliveira Fernandes
A. T. Still University - Missouri School of Dentistry & Oral Health, St. Louis, MO, USA; Corresponding author. 1500 Park Ave, St Louis, MO, USA.
Sergio Alexandre Gehrke
Instituto de Bioingenieria, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Elche, Alicante, Spain; Department of Materials Engineering, Pontificial Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil; Department of Biotechnology, Universidad Católica de Murcia (UCAM), Murcia, Spain; Corresponding author. Universidad Catolica de Murcia, Spain.
Background: The goal of this in vitro study was to compare three different surfaces: two types of implant surfaces commercially available ([a] smooth/machined and [b] acid-treated surface) versus (c) anodized surface. Discs were manufactured with commercially pure titanium (CP) grade IV, which were subsequently analyzed by scanning microscopy and fibroblastic and osteoblastic cell cultures. Methods: Ninety-nine discs (5 × 2 mm) were manufactured in titanium grade IV and received different surface treatments: (i) Mach group: machined; (ii) AA group: double acid etch; and (iii) AN group: anodizing treatment. Three discs from each group were analyzed by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) to obtain surface topography images and qualitatively analyzed by EDS. Balb/c 3T3 fibroblasts and pre-osteoblastic cells (MC3T3-E1 lineage) were used to investigate each group's biological response (n = 10/cellular type). The data were compared statistically using the ANOVA one-way test, considered as a statistically significant difference p Mach > AN). There was similar behavior for cell adhesion for the test groups (Mach and AN), with greater adhesion of Balb/c 3T3 fibroblasts compared to MC3T3 cells; in the AA group, there was greater adherence for MC3T3 cells compared to Balb/c 3T3 fibroblasts. Conclusions: The findings suggest that different surface characteristics can produce different biological responses, possibly cell-line dependent. These findings have important implications for the design of implantable medical devices, where the surface characteristics can significantly impact its biocompatibility.
