Biocompatibility of three bioabsorbable membranes assessed in FGH fibroblasts and human osteoblast like cells culture

Head & Face Medicine

Denildo de Magalhães³  Lucas Zago Naves²  Priscila Barbosa Ferreira Soares⁴  Camilla Christian Gomes Moura¹  Analice Giovani Pereira⁴  Paulo Vinícius Soares⁶  Michelle Pereira Costa Mundim Soares⁵ 

[1] Adjunct Professor of Federal University of Triangulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil;Post Doctoral student of Dentistry School of Estadual University of Campinas, Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil;Associate Professor of Histology of Periodontics and Implant Dentistry Department at the Dentistry School of Federal University of Uberlandia, Av. Para 1720, Campus Umuarama, Uberlandia, Minas Gerais, Zip Code 38400-000, Brazil;Doctoral student of Dentistry School of Federal University of Uberlandia, Uberlandia, Minas Gerais, Brazil;Master degree of Dentistry School of Federal University of Uberlandia, Uberlandia, Minas Gerais, Brazil;Associate Professor of Operative Dentistry and Dental Materials Department at the Dentistry School of Federal University of Uberlandia, Uberlandia, Minas Gerais, Brazil

关键词: Osteoblast;    Fibroblast;    Regeneration;    Biosorbable;    Membranes;   

Others  :  1231245
DOI  :  10.1186/1746-160X-10-29

 received in 2013-12-16, accepted in 2014-07-15,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Objectives

Specific physical and chemical features of the membranes may influence the healing of periodontal tissues after guided tissue regeneration (GTR). The aim of the present investigation was to analyze the biological effects of three bioabsorbable membranes. The hypothesis is that all tested membranes present similar biological effects.

Methods

Human osteoblast like-cells (SaOs-2) and gingival fibroblasts FGH (BCRJ -RJ) were cultured in DMEM medium. The viability of the cells cultured on the membranes was assesses using 3-(4,5-Dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT). Quantitative determination of activated human Transforming Growth Factor beta 1 (TGF-β1) on the supernatants of the cell culture was observed. Samples were examined using scanning electron microscope (SEM).

Results

SaOs2, in 24 hours, PLA group showed higher values when compared to other groups (P < 0.05). All groups presented statistical significance values when compared two times. In 4 h and 24 h, for the fibroblasts group, significantly difference was found to PLA membrane, when compared with the other groups (p < 0.05). For TGFβ1 analyzes, comparing 4 and 24 h, for the osteoblast supernatant, COL1 and PLA groups showed statistically significant difference (p <0,008). On the analysis of culture supernatants of fibroblasts, in 24 hours, only PLA group presented significant difference (p = 0,008).

Conclusions

The biomaterials analyzed did not show cytotoxicity, since no membrane presented lower results than the control group. PLA membrane presented the best performance due to its higher cell viability and absorbance levels of proliferation. Both collagen membranes showed similar results either when compared to each other or to the control group.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Soares et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Inanc B, Arslan YE, Seker S, Elcin AE, Elcin YM: Periodontal ligament cellular structures engineered with electrospun poly(DL-lactide-co-glycolide) nanofibrous membrane scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res A 2009, 90(1):186-195.
• [2]Needleman I, Tucker R, Giedrys-Leeper E, Worthington H: A systematic review of guided tissue regeneration for periodontal infrabony defects. J Periodontal Res 2002, 37(5):380-388.
• [3]Thangakumaran S, Sudarsan S, Arun KV, Talwar A, James JR: Osteoblast response (initial adhesion and alkaline phosphatase activity) following exposure to a barrier membrane/enamel matrix derivative combination. Indian J Dent Res 2009, 20(1):7-12.
• [4]Parrish LC, Miyamoto T, Fong N, Mattson JS, Cerutis DR: Non-bioabsorbable vs. bioabsorbable membrane: assessment of their clinical efficacy in guided tissue regeneration technique. A systematic review. J Oral Sci 2009, 51(3):383-400.
• [5]Kasaj A, Reichert C, Gotz H, Rohrig B, Smeets R, Willershausen B: In vitro evaluation of various bioabsorbable and nonresorbable barrier membranes for guided tissue regeneration. Head Face Med 2008, 4:22. BioMed Central Full Text
• [6]Isaka J, Ohazama A, Kobayashi M, Nagashima C, Takiguchi T, Kawasaki H, Tachikawa T, Hasegawa K: Participation of periodontal ligament cells with regeneration of alveolar bone. J Periodontol 2001, 72(3):314-323.
• [7]Lekovic V, Camargo PM, Weinlaender M, Kenney EB, Vasilic N: Combination use of bovine porous bone mineral, enamel matrix proteins, and a bioabsorbable membrane in intrabony periodontal defects in humans. J Periodontol 2001, 72(5):583-589.
• [8]Dahlin C, Linde A, Gottlow J, Nyman S: Healing of bone defects by guided tissue regeneration. Plast Reconstr Surg 1988, 81(5):672-676.
• [9]Moses O, Vitrial D, Aboodi G, Sculean A, Tal H, Kozlovsky A, Artzi Z, Weinreb M, Nemcovsky CE: Biodegradation of three different collagen membranes in the rat calvarium: a comparative study. J Periodontol 2008, 79(5):905-911.
• [10]Bornstein MM, Heynen G, Bosshardt DD, Buser D: Effect of two bioabsorbable barrier membranes on bone regeneration of standardized defects in calvarial bone: a comparative histomorphometric study in pigs. J Periodontol 2009, 80(8):1289-1299.
• [11]Behring J, Junker R, Walboomers XF, Chessnut B, Jansen JA: Toward guided tissue and bone regeneration: morphology, attachment, proliferation, and migration of cells cultured on collagen barrier membranes. A Syst Rev Odontol 2008, 96(1):1-11.
• [12]Retzepi M, Donos N: Guided Bone Regeneration: biological principle and therapeutic applications. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010, 21(6):567-576.
• [13]Carpio L, Loza J, Lynch S, Genco R: Guided bone regeneration around endosseous implants with anorganic bovine bone mineral. A randomized controlled trial comparing bioabsorbable versus non-resorbable barriers. J Periodontol 2000, 71(11):1743-1749.
• [14]Bilir A, Aybar B, Tanrikulu SH, Issever H, Tuna S: Biocompatibility of different barrier membranes in cultures of human CRL 11372 osteoblast-like cells: an immunohistochemical study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007, 18(1):46-52.
• [15]Alpar B, Leyhausen G, Gunay H, Geurtsen W: Compatibility of resorbable and nonresorbable guided tissue regeneration membranes in cultures of primary human periodontal ligament fibroblasts and human osteoblast-like cells. Clin Oral Investig 2000, 4(4):219-225.
• [16]Mosmann T: Rapid colorimetric assay for cellular growth and survival: application to proliferation and cytotoxicity assays. J Immunol Methods 1983, 65(1–2):55-63.
• [17]Simain-Sato F, Lahmouzi J, Kalykakis GK, Heinen E, Defresne MP, De Pauw MC, Grisar T, Legros JJ, Legrand R: Culture of gingival fibroblasts on bioabsorbable regenerative materials in vitro. J Periodontol 1999, 70(10):1234-1239.
• [18]Rothamel D, Schwarz F, Sculean A, Herten M, Scherbaum W, Becker J: Biocompatibility of various collagen membranes in cultures of human PDL fibroblasts and human osteoblast-like cells. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004, 15(4):443-449.
• [19]Chandrahasa S, Murray PE, Namerow KN: Proliferation of mature ex vivo human dental pulp using tissue engineering scaffolds. J Endod 2011, 37:1236-1239.
• [20]Gebhardt M, Murray PE, Namerow KN, Kuttler S, Garcia-Godoy F: Cell survival within pulp and periodontal constructs. J Endod 2009, 35(1):63-66.