Influence of implant material and surface on kind and strength of cell / material attachment

Basic data for this talk

Information about the event

Abstract

Introduction For guided regeneration of periimplant hard and soft tissues it is of crucial importance to evaluate the interaction of different cofactors and to know the decisive activating cascades. The classic triad of tissue engineering and (personalised) tissue regeneration is the interplay of cells, biologically active proteins and a carrier matrix (scaffold). Regarding the typical periimplant defect it does not seem sensible to support the physiological course of regeneration by replacing the lacking tissue by extra corporally designed and fabricated constructs; the vascular coupling and therefore the integration of the implanted cells often remains difficult. It is much more promising to try to stimulate the body's own, intrinsic regenerative capacity and hence to significantly increase the tissue restoration in situ. In the context of personalised regenerative concepts, the principle of an autologous approach combining individual cells, a (resorbable) matrix and bioactive mediators seems to provide the most reliable results. We used human adipose derived stromal cells (hADSC) isolated from abdominal fat tissue as a promising source for mesenchymal stromal cells. These multipotent autologous cells showed the best properties. Results were compared to edaphic cells as human mandibular osteoblasts (hOB) and human gingival fibroblasts (HGF). Methods In this study part characteristics' of cell / material attachment of hADSC compared to edaphic cells (human mandibular osteoblasts and human gingival fibroblast) cultivated on two different dental implant materials (titanium and zirconium) were analysed. Furthermore, the influences of different surface textures (rough and polished / machined) were analysed (titanium SLA- and PT-surface, zirconium ZLA- and M-surface). Cells were seeded onto dental material (test bodies) and analysed at three different time points (1d-7d-14d). Changes in cell morphology was analysed by histological staining of cytoskeleton (actin filaments) and by scanning electron microscopy. Expression of extra cellular matrix marker and focal adhesion marker were analysed on gene (RT-qPCR) and protein (ELISA) level. Statistical analysis was carried out by one way ANOVA and p<0.05 (SPSS; version 24). Results Cell morphology was significantly influenced by surface texture. Arrangement of cytoskeleton was totally altered on rough surfaces. Cell arrangement on rough surfaces was random and non-oriented. Cell/cell or cell/matrix contacts via pseudopodia were distinct. Expression of focal adhesion marker and extra cellular matrix marker reflected this. Gene expression of integrin alpha type 2 and type V increased on rough surfaces whereas it decreased in control group and on machined/polished surfaces. Protein expression of focal adhesion kinase (FAK), laminin and vimentin decreased or remained constant in control group and on machined/polished surfaces and increased on rough surfaces. Conclusion A distinct statement on differences in mode and strength of cell/matrix attachment between titanium and zirconium dioxide could not been made. However, differences between surface textures were observed. The mode and strength of cell/matrix attachment was significantly influenced by surface texture confirmed by altered expression of specific marker.

Speakers from the University of Münster

Jung, Susanne	Clinic for Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Kleinheinz, Johannes	Clinic for Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Sielker, Sonja	Clinic for Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery