Biocompatibility of Subperiosteal Dental Implants: Effects of Differently Treated Titanium Surfaces on the Expression of ECM-Related Genes in Gingival Fibroblasts

Introduction: Titanium alloys currently are the most used material for the manufacture of dental endosseous implants. However, in partially or totally edentulous patients, varying degrees of maxillary bone resorption usually occur, making the application of these devices difficult or even impossible. In these cases, a suitable alternative is offered by subperiosteal implants, whose use is undergoing a revival of interest following the introduction of novel, computer-assisted manufacturing techniques. Several procedures have been developed for the modification of titanium surfaces so to improve their biocompatibility and integration with bone. Information is, however, still incomplete as far as the most convenient surface modifications to apply with subperiosteal implants, in which an integration with soft mucosal tissues is just as important. Objectives: The present study aimed at evaluating whether different treatments of titanium surfaces can produce different effects on the viability, attachment, and differentiation of gingival fibroblasts, i.e., the cell type mainly involved in osteointegration as well as the healing of soft tissues injured by surgical procedures, in order to verify whether any of the treatments are preferable under these respects. Methodology: The human immortalized gingival fibroblast (CRL-4061 line) were cultured in the presence of titanium specimens previously treated with five different procedures for surface modification: (i) raw machined (Ti-1); (ii) electropolished (Ti-2); (iii) sand-blasted acid-etched (Ti-3); (iv) Al Ti Color™ proprietary procedure (Ti-4); and (v) anodized (Ti-5). At different times of incubation, viability and proliferation of cells, was determined along with the changes in the expression patterns of ECM-related genes involved in fibroblast attachment and differentiation: vinculin, fibronectin, collagen type I-alpha 1 chain, focal adhesion kinase, integrin β-1, and N-cadherin. Three different experiments were carried out for each experimental point. The release from fibroblasts of endothelin-1 was also analyzed as a marker of inflammatory response. The proliferation and migration of fibroblasts were evaluated by scratch tests. Results: None of the five types of titanium surface tested significantly affected the fibroblasts’ viability and proliferation. The release of endothelin-1 was also not significantly affected by any of the specimens. On the other hand, all titanium specimens significantly stimulated the expression of ECM-related genes at varying degrees. The proliferation and migration abilities of fibroblasts were also significantly stimulated by all types of titanium surface, with a higher-to-lower efficiency in the order: Ti-3 > Ti-4 > Ti-5 > Ti-2 > Ti-1, thus identifying sandblasting acid-etching as the most convenient treatment. Conclusions: Our observations suggest that the titanium alloys used for manufacturing subperiosteal dental implants do not produce cytotoxic or proinflammatory effects on gingival fibroblasts, and that sandblasting acid-etching may be the surface treatment of choice as to stimulate the differentiation of gingival fibroblasts in the direction of attachment and migration, i.e., the features allegedly associated with a more efficient implant osteointegration, wound healing, and connective tissue seal formation.