| Literature DB >> 28788407 |
Amol Chaudhari1, Joke Duyck2, Annabel Braem3, Jozef Vleugels4, Hervé Petite5, Delphine Logeart-Avramoglou6, Ignace Naert7, Johan A Martens8, Katleen Vandamme9.
Abstract
Surface modification of titanium implants is used to enhance osseointegration. The study objective was to evaluate five modified titanium surfaces in terms of cytocompatibility and pro-osteogenic/pro-angiogenic properties for human mesenchymal stromal cells: amorphous microporous silica (AMS), bone morphogenetic protein-2 immobilized on AMS (AMS + BMP), bio-active glass (BAG) and two titanium coatings with different porosity (T1; T2). Four surfaces served as controls: uncoated Ti (Ti), Ti functionalized with BMP-2 (Ti + BMP), Ti surface with a thickened titanium oxide layer (TiO₂) and a tissue culture polystyrene surface (TCPS). The proliferation of eGFP-fLuc (enhanced green fluorescence protein-firefly luciferase) transfected cells was tracked non-invasively by fluorescence microscopy and bio-luminescence imaging. The implant surface-mediated effects on cell differentiation potential was tracked by determination of osteogenic and angiogenic parameters [alkaline phosphatase (ALP); osteocalcin (OC); osteoprotegerin (OPG); vascular endothelial growth factor-A (VEGF-A)]. Unrestrained cell proliferation was observed on (un)functionalized Ti and AMS surfaces, whereas BAG and porous titanium coatings T1 and T2 did not support cell proliferation. An important pro-osteogenic and pro-angiogenic potential of the AMS + BMP surface was observed. In contrast, coating the Ti surface with BMP did not affect the osteogenic differentiation of the progenitor cells. A significantly slower BMP-2 release from AMS compared to Ti supports these findings. In the unfunctionalized state, Ti was found to be superior to AMS in terms of OPG and VEGF-A production. AMS is suggested to be a promising implant coating material for bioactive agents delivery.Entities:
Keywords: human bone marrow stromal cells; in vitro cytocompatibility; osseointegration; osteogenic differentiation; surface coating; titanium
Year: 2013 PMID: 28788407 PMCID: PMC5452737 DOI: 10.3390/ma6125533
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Characterization of the modified titanium surfaces. AMS, amorphous microporous silica; BMP, bone morphogenetic protein; BAG, bio-active glass.
| Group | Contact Angle (°) | Topography parameter | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sa (µm) | Str | Sdr (%) | ||
| 75.53 ± 0.51 | 0.29 ± 0.005 | 0.54 ± 0.02 | 0.35 ± 0.01 | |
| 36.56 ± 0.21 * | 0.61 ± 0.01 * | 0.32 ± 0.06 * | 0.91 ± 0.03 * | |
| ≈0 | 0.61 ± 0.02 * | 0.24 ± 0.03 * | 1.58 ± 0.11 * | |
| ≈0 | 0.64 ± 0.02 * | 0.25 ± 0.03 * | 1.68 ± 0.10 * | |
| 45.10 ± 0.67 * | 0.31 ± 0.01 | 0.53 ± 0.05 | 0.37 ± 0.01 | |
| ≈0 | 3.25 ± 0.13 * | 0.79 ± 0.02 * | 97.23 ± 7.53 * | |
| 99.22 ± 0.51 * | 7.86 ± 0.21 *,† | 0.70 ± 0.03 * | 102.50 ± 6.26 *,† | |
| 101.27 ± 0.32 * | 9.06 ± 0.21 *,† | 0.72 ± 0.03 * | 188.98 ± 6.81 *,† | |
Sa, arithmetic mean of absolute values of the surface departures from the mean plane; Str, measure of spatial isotropy or directionality of the surface texture; Sdr, percentage of additional surface area due to the surface modification as compared to measurement of an ideal plane; * significantly different from the uncoated Ti surface; † significant differences among the groups.
Figure 1Qualitative SEM analysis of surface topography of the modified titanium surfaces. (a) Ti; (b) AMS; (c) Ti + BMP; (d) AMS + BMP; (e) TiO2; (f) BAG; (g) T1; and (h) T2. The arrow in figure (h) shows a typical hole created by the use of emulsion-based electrophoretic deposition of TiH2.
Figure 2Adhesion of human mesenchymal stromal cells (hMSCs) at 24 h post-seeding (a) and proliferation (b) on the modified Ti surfaces. The experiment was carried out for 18 days; n = 3 for each data point; the results are the mean ± SEM. Statistically significant differences (* p < 0.02) were analyzed for each surface compared to the others. TCPS, tissue culture polystyrene surface.
Figure 3Representative fluorescence microscopy images of hMSCs cultured for 18 days on Ti (a); AMS (b); Ti + BMP (c); AMS + BMP (d); TiO2 (e); BAG (f); T1 (g) and T2 (h), respectively.
Figure 4Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity of hMSCs cultured on modified Ti surfaces. n = 2 for each data point; the experiment was performed in duplicate. The results are the mean ± SD; statistically significant differences between the surface groups with p < 0.05 are shown by horizontal bars.
Figure 5Osteogenic markers: Amount of osteocalcin (OC) (a); osteoprotegerin (OPG) (b); and vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) (c) secreted into the culture medium by hMSCs cultured on modified Ti surfaces; n = 3 for each data point; the results are the mean ± SD. Statistically significant differences with p < 0.02 are shown by horizontal bars.
Figure 6BMP-2 release profiles. (a) Amount of BMP-2 released into the cell culture medium from the surface of Ti + BMP and AMS + BMP. BMP-2 was not found in the supernatants of Ti and AMS; (b) Cumulative BMP-2 released from Ti and AMS surfaces with adsorbed BMP-2. The results are the mean ± SEM. The statistically significant differences are shown by horizontal bars; * p < 0.02.