Preprint Article Version 1 This version is not peer-reviewed

Disproportionate Effect of Sub-Micron Topography on Osteoconductive Capability of Titanium

Version 1 : Received: 9 August 2019 / Approved: 12 August 2019 / Online: 12 August 2019 (12:35:48 CEST)

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

Saruta, J.; Sato, N.; Ishijima, M.; Okubo, T.; Hirota, M.; Ogawa, T. Disproportionate Effect of Sub-Micron Topography on Osteoconductive Capability of Titanium. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 4027. Saruta, J.; Sato, N.; Ishijima, M.; Okubo, T.; Hirota, M.; Ogawa, T. Disproportionate Effect of Sub-Micron Topography on Osteoconductive Capability of Titanium. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 4027.

Journal reference: Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 4027
DOI: 10.3390/ijms20164027

Abstract

Titanium micro-scale topography results in excellent osteoconductivity and bone-implant integration. However, the biological effects of sub-micron topography are unknown. We compared osteoblastic phenotypes and in vivo bone and implant integration abilities between titanium surfaces with micro- (1–5 µm) and sub-micro-scale (0.1–0.5 µm) topographies and machined titanium. Average roughness was 12.5 ± 0.65 nm, 123 ± 6.15 nm, and 24 ± 1.2 nm for machined, micro-rough, and sub-micro-rough surfaces, respectively. The micro-rough surface showed the fewest cells attaching during the initial stage and the lowest proliferation. Calcium deposition and expression of osteoblastic genes were highest on the sub-micro-rough surface and lowest on the machined surface. Bone-to-implant integration was strongest for the micro-rough surface, consistent with it having the greatest ability to retain cells in vitro. Thus, the biological effects of titanium surfaces are not necessarily proportional to the degree of roughness in osteoblastic cultures or in vivo. Sub-micro-rough titanium ameliorates the disadvantage of micro-rough titanium by restoring cell attachment and proliferation and enhances the rate of osteoblastic differentiation over that of micro-rough titanium; however, bone integration and the ability to retain cells are compromised due to its lower interfacial mechanical locking compared to that of micro-rough titanium.

Subject Areas

acid-etching; micro-rough; bone regeneration; sub-micro-rough; bone integration; osseointegration; dental implants; orthopedic implants

Comments (0)

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 0
Metrics 0


×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.