Adherence of human oral keratinocytes and gingival fibroblasts to nano-structured titanium surfaces

BMC Oral Health

Julia R Davies¹  Gunnel Svensäter¹  Jan Hall²  Tülay Yücel-Lindberg³  Marjan Dorkhan¹ 

[1] Department of Oral Biology, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö SE-205 06, Sweden;Nobel Biocare AB, Box 5190, Gothenburg SE- 402 26, Sweden;Department of Dental Medicine, Division of Periodontology, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge SE-141 04, Sweden

关键词: Oral bacteria;    Surface modification;    Dental implant;    Cell attachment;    Gingival fibroblasts;    Oral keratinocytes;   

Others  :  848318
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6831-14-75

 received in 2014-02-20, accepted in 2014-06-17,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

A key element for long-term success of dental implants is integration of the implant surface with the surrounding host tissues. Modification of titanium implant surfaces can enhance osteoblast activity but their effects on soft-tissue cells are unclear. Adherence of human keratinocytes and gingival fibroblasts to control commercially pure titanium (CpTi) and two surfaces prepared by anodic oxidation was therefore investigated. Since implant abutments are exposed to a bacteria-rich environment in vivo, the effect of oral bacteria on keratinocyte adhesion was also evaluated.

Methods

The surfaces were characterized using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The number of adhered cells and binding strength, as well as vitality of fibroblasts and keratinocytes were evaluated using confocal scanning laser microscopy after staining with Live/Dead Baclight. To evaluate the effect of bacteria on adherence and vitality, keratinocytes were co-cultured with a four-species streptococcal consortium.

Results

SEM analysis showed the two anodically oxidized surfaces to be nano-structured with differing degrees of pore-density. Over 24 hours, both fibroblasts and keratinocytes adhered well to the nano-structured surfaces, although to a somewhat lesser degree than to CpTi (range 42-89% of the levels on CpTi). The strength of keratinocyte adhesion was greater than that of the fibroblasts but no differences in adhesion strength could be observed between the two nano-structured surfaces and the CpTi. The consortium of commensal streptococci markedly reduced keratinocyte adherence on all the surfaces as well as compromising membrane integrity of the adhered cells.

Conclusion

Both the vitality and level of adherence of soft-tissue cells to the nano-structured surfaces was similar to that on CpTi. Co-culture with streptococci reduced the number of keratinocytes on all the surfaces to approximately the same level and caused cell damage, suggesting that commensal bacteria could affect adherence of soft-tissue cells to abutment surfaces in vivo.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Dorkhan et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Aas JA, Paster BJ, Stokes LN, Olsen I, Dewhirst FE: Defining the normal bacterial flora of the oral cavity. J Clin Microbiol 2005, 43:5721-5732.
• [2]Busscher H, van der Mei H, Subbiahdoss G, Jutte P, van den Dungen J, Zaat S, Schultz M, Grainger D: Biomaterial-associated infection: Locating the finish line in the race for the surface. Sci Transl Med 2012, 4:153.
• [3]Nyvad B, Kilian M: Microbiology of the early colonization of human enamel and root surfaces in vivo. Scand J Dent Res 1987, 95:369-380.
• [4]Kolenbrander PE, Andersen RN, Blehert DS, Egland PG, Foster JS, Palmer RJ: Communication among oral bacteria. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 2002, 66:486-505.
• [5]Jakubovics NS, Kerrigan SW, Nobbs AH, Stromberg N, van Dolleweerd CJ, Cox DM, Kelly CG, Jenkinson HF: Functions of cell surface-anchored antigen I/II family and hsa polypeptides in interactions of Streptococcus gordonii with host receptors. Infect Immun 2005, 73:6629-6638.
• [6]Kolenbrander PE, Palmer RJ, Rickard AH, Jakubovics NS, Chalmers NI, Diaz PI: Bacterial interactions and successions during plaque development. Periodontol 2000 2006, 42:47-79.
• [7]Dale BA: Periodontal epithelium: A newly recognized role in health and disease. Periodontol 2000 2002, 30:70-78.
• [8]Lindhe J, Berglundh T: The interface between the mucosa and the implant. Periodontol 2000 1998, 17:47-54.
• [9]Berglundh T, Lindhe J, Ericsson I, Marinello CP, Liljenberg B, Thomsen P: The soft tissue barrier at implants and teeth. Clin Oral Implants Res 1991, 2:81-90.
• [10]Gould TR, Brunette DM, Westbury L: The attachment mechanism of epithelial cells to titanium in vitro. J Periodontal Res 1981, 16:611-616.
• [11]Lauer G, Wiedmann-Al-Ahmad M, Otten JE, Hubner U, Schmelzeisen R, Schilli W: The titanium surface texture effects adherence and growth of human gingival keratinocytes and human maxillar osteoblast-like cells in vitro. Biomaterials 2001, 22:2799-2809.
• [12]Atsuta I, Yamaza T, Yoshinari M, Goto T, Kido MA, Kagiya T, Mino S, Shimono M, Tanaka T: Ultrastructural localization of laminin-5 (gamma2 chain) in the rat peri-implant oral mucosa around a titanium-dental implant by immuno-electron microscopy. Biomaterials 2005, 26:6280-6287.
• [13]Oh S, Finones RR, Daraio C, Chen L, Jin S: Growth of nano-scale hydroxyapatite using chemically treated titanium oxide nanotubes. Biomaterials 2005, 26:4938-4943.
• [14]Gittens RA, Olivares-Navarrete R, McLachlan T, Cai Y, Hyzy SL, Schneider JM, Schwartz Z, Sandhage KH, Boyan BD: Differential responses of osteoblast lineage cells to nanotopographically-modified, microroughened titanium–aluminum–vanadium alloy surfaces. Biomaterials 2012, 33:8986-8994.
• [15]Paldan H, Areva S, Tirri T, Peltola T, Lindholm TC, Lassila L, Pelliniemi LJ, Happonen RP, Narhi TO: Soft tissue attachment on sol–gel-treated titanium implants in vivo. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2008, 19:1283-1290.
• [16]Rossi S, Tirri T, Paldan H, Kuntsi-Vaattovaara H, Tulamo R, Narhi T: Peri-implant tissue response to TiO2 surface modified implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008, 19:348-355.
• [17]Wennerberg A, Fröjd V, Olsson M, Nannmark U, Emanuelsson L, Johansson P, Josefsson Y, Kangasniemi I, Peltola T, Tirri T, Thomsen P: Nanoporous TiO(3) thin film on titanium oral implants for enhanced human soft tissue adhesion: A light and electron microscopy study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2009, 13:184-196.
• [18]Zile MA, Puckett S, Webster TJ: Nanostructured titanium promotes keratinocyte density. J Biomed Mater Res 2011, 97:59-65.
• [19]Guida L, Oliva A, Basile MA, Giordanoo M, Nastri L, Annunziata M: Human gingival fibroblast functions are stimulated by oxidized nano-structured titanium surfaces. J Dent 2013, 41:900-907.
• [20]Cohen A, Liu-Synder P, Storey D, Webster TJ: Decreased fibroblast and increased osteoblast functions on ionic plasma deposited nanostructured Ti coatings. Nanoscale Res Letters 2007, 2:385-390.
• [21]Dorkhan M, Hall J, Uvdal P, Sandell A, Svensäter G, Davies JR: Crystalline anatase-rich titanium can reduce adherence of oral streptococci. Biofouling 2014. in press
• [22]Dickson MA, Hahn WC, Ino Y, Ronfard V, Wu JY, Weinberg RA, Louis DN, Li FP, Rheinwald JG: Human keratinocytes that express hTERT and also bypass a p16INK4a enforced mechanism that limits normal life spn become immortal yet retain normal growth and differentiation characteristics. Mol Cell Biol 2000, 20:1436-1447.
• [23]Okawachi H, Ayukawa Y, Atsuta I, Furuhashi A, Sakaguchi M, Yamane K, Koyano K: Effect of titanium surface calcium and magnesium on adhesive activity of epithelial-like cells and fibroblasts. Biointerphases 2012, 7:27.
• [24]Dorkhan M, de Paz LE C, Skepo M, Svensäter G, Davies JR: Effects of saliva or serum coating on adherence of Streptococcus oralis strains to titanium. Microbiology 2012, 158:390-397.
• [25]Bjursten LM, Rasmusson L, Oh S, Smith GC, Brammer KS, Jin S: Titanium dioxide nanotubes enhance bone bonding in vivo. J Biomed Mat Res A 2010, 92:1218-1224.
• [26]Suketa N, Sawase T, Kitaura H, Naito M, Baba K, Nakayama K, Wennerberg A, Atsuta M: An antibacterial surface on dental implants, based on the photocatalytic bactericidal effect. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005, 7:105-111.
• [27]Ma Q, Mei S, Ji K, Zhang Y, Chu PK: Immobilization of Ag nanoparticles/FGF-2 on a modified titanium implant surface and improved human gingival fibroblasts behaviour. J Biomed Mater Res 2011, 98:274-286.
• [28]Abrahamsson I, Zitzmann NU, Berglundh T, Linder E, Wennerberg A, Lindhe J: The mucosal attachment to titanium implants with different surface characteristics: An experimental study in dogs. J Clin Periodontol 2002, 29:448-455.
• [29]Astrand P, Engquist B, Anzen B, Bergendal T, Hallman M, Karlsson U, Kvint S, Lysell L, Rundcranz T: A three-year follow-up report of a comparative study of ITI dental implants and branemark system implants in the treatment of the partially edentulous maxilla. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2004, 6:130-141.
• [30]Moon IS, Berglundh T, Abrahamsson I, Linder E, Lindhe J: The barrier between the keratinized mucosa and the dental implant. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 1999, 26:658-663.
• [31]Lee JH, Wang H, Kaplan JB, Lee WY: Effects of Staphylococcus epidermidis on osteoblast cell adhesion and viability on a Ti alloy surface in a microfluidic co-culture environment. Acta Biomater 2010, 6:4422-4429.
• [32]Subbiahdoss G, Kuijer R, Busscher HJ, van der Mei HC: Mammalian cell growth versus biofilm formation on biomaterial surfaces in an in vitro post-operative contamination model. Microbiology 2010, 156:3073-3078.
• [33]Carlsson J, Griffith C: Fermentation products and bacterial yields in glucose-limited and nitrogen-limited cultures of streptococci. Arch Oral Biol 1974, 19:1105-1109.
• [34]Drucker D, Melville T: Fermentation end-products of cariogenic and non-cariogenic streptococci. Arch Oral Biol 1968, 13:565-570.
• [35]Niebuhr M, Baumert K, Werfel T: TLR-2-mediated cytokine and chemokine secretion in human keratinocytes. Exp Dermatol 2010, 19:873-877.