| Literature DB >> 32051472 |
Mayuko Shiozawa1, Haruka Takeuchi2, Yosuke Akiba3, Kaori Eguchi2, Nami Akiba2, Yujin Aoyagi2, Masako Nagasawa2, Hiroyuki Kuwae1, Kenji Izumi4, Katsumi Uoshima2, Jun Mizuno5.
Abstract
The micro- and nanosize surface topography of dental implants has been shown to affect the growth of surrounding cells. In this study, standardized and controlled periodic nanopatterns were fabricated with nanosized surface roughness on titanium substrates, and their influence on bone marrow stromal cells investigated. Cell proliferation assays revealed that the bare substrate with a 1.7 nm surface roughness has lower hydrophilicity but higher proliferation ability than that with a 0.6 nm surface roughness. Further, with the latter substrate, directional cell growth was observed for line and groove patterns with a width of 100 nm and a height of 50 or 100 nm, but not for those with a height of 10 or 25 nm. With the smooth substrate, time-lapse microscopic analyses showed that more than 80% of the bone marrow cells on the line and groove pattern with a height of 100 nm grew and divided along the lines. As the nanosized grain structure controls the cell proliferation rate and the nanosized line and groove structure (50-100 nm) controls cell migration, division, and growth orientation, these standardized nanosized titanium structures can be used to elucidate the mechanisms by which surface topography regulates tissue responses to biomaterials.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32051472 PMCID: PMC7016147 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-59395-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Scanning electron microscopy images of titanium substrates. Bare flat surfaces of titanium substrates with (A) 0.6 nm surface roughness with no grains and (B) 1.7 nm surface roughness with single nanosized grains. Titanium substrates with a line and groove pattern with a height of 100 nm (C) and 200 nm pitch (D), and line and groove pattern with a height of 10 nm (E).
Figure 2Water contact angles on bare titanium substrates. Substrate with surface roughness (A) of 0.6 nm and (B) of 1.7 nm.
Figure 3Cell proliferation analysis. The 1.7 nm surface roughness substrate shows a higher cell proliferation ability than the 0.6 nm surface roughness substrate.
Figure 4Cell alignment control ability of line and groove patterns on titanium substrates.
Figure 5Histological analysis with fluorescence immunocytochemistry. The BMSCs were cultured on a flat substrate (A,C,E) or a substrate with a line and groove pattern (B,D,F).
Figure 6 Time-lapse images of migrating BMSCs cultured on titanium substrates for 15 hours. Serial images of migrating and proliferating BMSCs cultured on a flat bare substrate (A–G) (Time laps image of 72 hours culture. Movie S1: supplemental) or a line and groove patterned substrate (H–N) (Time laps image of 72 hours culture. Movie S2: supplemental).