Cargando…
Interactions of Osteoprogenitor Cells with a Novel Zirconia Implant Surface
Background: This study compared the in vitro response of a mouse pre-osteoblast cell line on a novel sandblasted zirconia surface with that of titanium. Material and Methods: The MC3T3-E1 subclone 4 osteoblast precursor cell line was cultured on either sandblasted titanium (SBCpTi) or sandblasted zi...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7565437/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32708701 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfb11030050 |
_version_ | 1783595932653191168 |
---|---|
author | Munro, Thomas Miller, Catherine M. Antunes, Elsa Sharma, Dileep |
author_facet | Munro, Thomas Miller, Catherine M. Antunes, Elsa Sharma, Dileep |
author_sort | Munro, Thomas |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: This study compared the in vitro response of a mouse pre-osteoblast cell line on a novel sandblasted zirconia surface with that of titanium. Material and Methods: The MC3T3-E1 subclone 4 osteoblast precursor cell line was cultured on either sandblasted titanium (SBCpTi) or sandblasted zirconia (SBY-TZP). The surface topography was analysed by three-dimensional laser microscopy and scanning electron microscope. The wettability of the discs was also assessed. The cellular response was quantified by assessing the morphology (day 1), proliferation (day 1, 3, 5, 7, 9), viability (day 1, 9), and migration (0, 6, 24 h) assays. Results: The sandblasting surface treatment in both titanium and zirconia increased the surface roughness by rendering a defined surface topography with titanium showing more apparent nano-topography. The wettability of the two surfaces showed no significant difference. The zirconia surface resulted in improved cellular spreading and a significantly increased rate of migration compared to titanium. However, the cellular proliferation and viability noted in our experiments were not significantly different on the zirconia and titanium surfaces. Conclusions: The novel, roughened zirconia surface elicited cellular responses comparable to, or exceeding that, of titanium. Therefore, this novel zirconia surface may be an acceptable substitute for titanium as a dental implant material. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7565437 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75654372020-10-26 Interactions of Osteoprogenitor Cells with a Novel Zirconia Implant Surface Munro, Thomas Miller, Catherine M. Antunes, Elsa Sharma, Dileep J Funct Biomater Article Background: This study compared the in vitro response of a mouse pre-osteoblast cell line on a novel sandblasted zirconia surface with that of titanium. Material and Methods: The MC3T3-E1 subclone 4 osteoblast precursor cell line was cultured on either sandblasted titanium (SBCpTi) or sandblasted zirconia (SBY-TZP). The surface topography was analysed by three-dimensional laser microscopy and scanning electron microscope. The wettability of the discs was also assessed. The cellular response was quantified by assessing the morphology (day 1), proliferation (day 1, 3, 5, 7, 9), viability (day 1, 9), and migration (0, 6, 24 h) assays. Results: The sandblasting surface treatment in both titanium and zirconia increased the surface roughness by rendering a defined surface topography with titanium showing more apparent nano-topography. The wettability of the two surfaces showed no significant difference. The zirconia surface resulted in improved cellular spreading and a significantly increased rate of migration compared to titanium. However, the cellular proliferation and viability noted in our experiments were not significantly different on the zirconia and titanium surfaces. Conclusions: The novel, roughened zirconia surface elicited cellular responses comparable to, or exceeding that, of titanium. Therefore, this novel zirconia surface may be an acceptable substitute for titanium as a dental implant material. MDPI 2020-07-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7565437/ /pubmed/32708701 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfb11030050 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Munro, Thomas Miller, Catherine M. Antunes, Elsa Sharma, Dileep Interactions of Osteoprogenitor Cells with a Novel Zirconia Implant Surface |
title | Interactions of Osteoprogenitor Cells with a Novel Zirconia Implant Surface |
title_full | Interactions of Osteoprogenitor Cells with a Novel Zirconia Implant Surface |
title_fullStr | Interactions of Osteoprogenitor Cells with a Novel Zirconia Implant Surface |
title_full_unstemmed | Interactions of Osteoprogenitor Cells with a Novel Zirconia Implant Surface |
title_short | Interactions of Osteoprogenitor Cells with a Novel Zirconia Implant Surface |
title_sort | interactions of osteoprogenitor cells with a novel zirconia implant surface |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7565437/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32708701 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfb11030050 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT munrothomas interactionsofosteoprogenitorcellswithanovelzirconiaimplantsurface AT millercatherinem interactionsofosteoprogenitorcellswithanovelzirconiaimplantsurface AT antuneselsa interactionsofosteoprogenitorcellswithanovelzirconiaimplantsurface AT sharmadileep interactionsofosteoprogenitorcellswithanovelzirconiaimplantsurface |