Biointerface: protein enhanced stem cells binding to implant surface
First Online: 20 June 2012 Received: 20 November 2011 Accepted: 21 May 2012 DOI:
Cite this article as: Chrzanowski, W., Kondyurin, A., Lee, J.H. et al. J Mater Sci: Mater Med (2012) 23: 2203. doi:10.1007/s10856-012-4687-2 Abstract
The number of metallic implantable devices placed every year is estimated at 3.7 million. This number has been steadily increasing over last decades at a rate of around 8 %. In spite of the many successes of the devices the implantation of biomaterial into tissues almost universally leads to the development of an avascular sac, which consists of fibrous tissue around the device and walls off the implant from the body. This reaction can be detrimental to the function of implant, reduces its lifetime, and necessitates repeated surgery. Clearly, to reduce the number of revision surgeries and improve long-term implant function it is necessary to enhance device integration by modulating cell adhesion and function. In this paper we have demonstrated that it is possible to enhance stem cell attachment using engineered biointerfaces. To create this functional interface, samples were coated with polymer (as a precursor) and then ion implanted to create a reactive interface that aids the binding of biomolecules—fibronectin. Both AFM and XPS analyses confirmed the presence of protein layers on the samples. The amount of protein was significant greater for the ion implanted surfaces and was not disrupted upon washing with detergent, hence the formation of strong bonds with the interface was confirmed. While, for non ion implanted surfaces, a decrease of protein was observed after washing with detergent. Finally, the number of stem cells attached to the surface was enhanced for ion implanted surfaces. The studies presented confirm that the developed bionterface with immobilised fibronectin is an effective means to modulate stem cell attachment.
Shabalovskaya S, Anderegg J, Van Humbeeck J. Critical overview of Nitinol surfaces and their modifications for medical applications. Acta Biomater. 2008;4(3):447–67.
Shabalovskaya SA, et al. The electrochemical characteristics of native Nitinol surfaces. Biomaterials. 2009;30(22):3662–71.
Shabalovskaya SA, et al. The influence of surface oxides on the distribution and release of nickel from Nitinol wires. Biomaterials. 2009;30(4):468–77.
Andreasen GF, Morrow RE. Laboratory and clinical analyses of nitinol wire. Am J Orthod. 1978;73(2):142–51.
Duerig T, Pelton A, Stöckel D. An overview of nitinol medical applications. Mater Sci Eng A. 1999;273–275:149–60.
Sachdeva RCL, Miyazaki S. Nitinol as a biomedical material. In: Buschow KHJ, et al., editors. Encyclopedia of materials: science and technology. Oxford: Elsevier; 2001. p. 6155–60.
Chu PK. Enhancement of surface properties of biomaterials using plasma-based technologies. Surf Coat Technol. 2007;201(19–20):8076–82.
Chrzanowski W, et al. Effect of surface treatment on the bioactivity of nickel–titanium. Acta Biomater. 2008;4(6):1969–84.
Chrzanowski W, et al. Chemical, corrosion and topographical analysis of stainless steel implants after different implantation periods. J Biomater Appl. 2008;23(1):51–71.
Chrzanowski W, et al. Tailoring cell behavior on polymers by the incorporation of titanium doped phosphate glass filler. Adv Eng Mater. 2010;12(7):B298–308.
Beyersmann D, Hartwig A. Carcinogenic metal compounds: recent insight into molecular and cellular mechanisms. Arch Toxicol. 2008;82(8):493–512.
Lu H, et al. Carcinogenic effect of nickel compounds. Mol Cell Biochem. 2005;279(1):45–67.
Es-Souni M, Es-Souni M, Fischer-Brandies H. Assessing the biocompatibility of NiTi shape memory alloys used for medical applications. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2005;381:557–67.
Denkhaus E, Salnikow K. Nickel essentiality, toxicity, and carcinogenicity. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2002;42(1):35–56.
Ryhanen J. Biocompatibility evaluation of nickel–titanium shape memory metal alloy. PhD Thesis, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Oulu University Library, Oulu; 1999. ISBN: 951-42-5206-3.
Assad M, et al. Comparative in vitro biocompatibility of nickel–titanium, pure nickel, pure titanium, and stainless steel: genotoxicity and atomic absorption evaluation. Biomed Mater Eng. 1999;9(1):1–12.
Ryhänen J, et al. Biocompatibility of nickel–titanium shape memory metal and its corrosion behavior in human cell cultures. J Biomed Mater Res. 1997;35(4):451–7.
Wever DJ, et al. Cytotoxic, allergic and genotoxic activity of a nickel–titanium alloy. Biomaterials. 1997;18(16):1115–20.
Chrzanowski W, et al. Influence of the anodic oxidation on the physicochemical properties of the Ti6Al4V ELI alloy. J Mater Process Technol. 2005;162–163:163–8.
Chrzanowski W, et al. Surface preparation of bioactive Ni–Ti alloy using alkali, thermal treatments and spark oxidation. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2008;19(4):1553–7.
Chrzanowski W, et al. Role of surface nickel content on human cell cytoskeleton formation on Nitinol. Eur Cell Mater. 2009;18(Suppl. 2):54.
Bogdanski D, et al. Easy assessment of the biocompatibility of Ni–Ti alloys by in vitro cell culture experiments on a functionally graded Ni–NiTi–Ti material. Biomaterials. 2002;23(23):4549–55.
Chrzanowski W, et al. Nanomechanical evaluation of nickel–titanium surface properties after alkali and electrochemical treatments. J R Soc Interface. 2008;5(26):1009–22.
Tan L, Dodd RA, Crone WC. Corrosion and wear-corrosion behavior of NiTi modified by plasma source ion implantation. Biomaterials. 2003;24(22):3931–9.
Bansiddhi A, et al. Porous NiTi for bone implants: a review. Acta Biomater. 2008;4(4):773–82.
Roy RK, et al. Improvement of adhesion of DLC coating on nitinol substrate by hybrid ion beam deposition technique. Vacuum. 2009;83(9):1179–83.
Bilek M, McKenzie D. Plasma modified surfaces for covalent immobilization of functional biomolecules in the absence of chemical linkers: towards better biosensors and a new generation of medical implants. Biophys Rev. 2010;2(2):55–65.
Lord MS, Foss M, Besenbacher F. Influence of nanoscale surface topography on protein adsorption and cellular response. Nano Today. 2010;5(1):66–78.
Chrzanowski W, et al. Impaired bacterial attachment to light activated Ni–Ti alloy. Mater Sci Eng C. 2010;30(2):225–34.
Kondyurin A, Nosworthy NJ, Bilek MMM. Attachment of horseradish peroxidase to polytetrafluorethylene (teflon) after plasma immersion ion implantation. Acta Biomater. 2008;4(5):1218–25.
Bilek MMM, et al. Free radical functionalization of surfaces to prevent adverse responses to biomedical devices. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108(35):14405–10.
Kondyurin A, Bilek MMM. Ion beam treatment of polymers. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2008. p. 205–41. ISBN: 9780080446929.
Chrzanowski W, et al. In vitro studies on the influence of surface modification of Ni–Ti alloy on human bone cells. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2010;93A(4):1596–608.
Hallab NJ, et al. Evaluation of metallic and polymeric biomaterial surface energy and surface roughness characteristics for directed cell adhesion. Tissue Eng. 2004;7(1):16.
Abou Neel EA, et al. Structure and properties of strontium-doped phosphate-based glasses. J R Soc Interface. 2009;6(34):435–46.
Schrader B. Infrared and Raman spectroscopy. Weinheim: Wiley; 2008.
Höök F, et al. A comparative study of protein adsorption on titanium oxide surfaces using in situ ellipsometry, optical waveguide lightmode spectroscopy, and quartz crystal microbalance/dissipation. Colloids Surf B. 2002;24(2):155–70.
Lord MS, et al. Monitoring cell adhesion on tantalum and oxidised polystyrene using a quartz crystal microbalance with dissipation. Biomaterials. 2006;27(26):4529–37.
Liu LY, et al. Reduced foreign body reaction to implanted biomaterials by surface treatment with oriented osteopontin. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed. 2008;19(6):821–35.
Ratner BD. A paradigm shift: biomaterials that heal. Polym Int. 2007;56(10):1183–5.
Ratner BD, Bryant SJ. Biomaterials: where we have been and where we are going. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2004;6:41–75.
Soon-Shiong P, et al. Insulin independence in a type 1 diabetic patient after encapsulated islet transplantation. Lancet. 1994;343(8903):950–1.
Anderson JM. Inflammation, wound healing, and the foreign body responses. In: Ratner BD, Hoffman AS, Schoen FJ, Lemons JE, editors. Biomaterials science: an introduction to materials in medicine. London: Elsevier; 2004. p. 296–304. ISBN: 9780125824637.
Ratner BD. Perspectives and possibilities in biomaterials science. In: Biomaterials science: an introduction to materials in medicine. 2004. p. 465–71.
Richards RG. Implant surfaces in fracture fixation: in vitro & in vivo. Eur Cell Mater. 2007;14(Suppl. 1):44.
Richards RG. The role of implant surfaces in fracture fixation. Eur Cell Mater. 2008;16(Suppl. 2):9.
Dalby MJ, et al. The control of human mesenchymal cell differentiation using nanoscale symmetry and disorder. Nat Mater. 2007;6(12):997–1003.
Lim JY, Donahue HJ. Cell sensing and response to micro- and nanostructured surfaces produced by chemical and topographic patterning. Tissue Eng. 2007;13(8):1879–91.
Neel EA, et al. Control of surface free energy in titanium doped phosphate based glasses by co-doping with zinc. J Biomed Mater Res. 2009;89B(2):392–407.
LeBaron RG, Athanasiou KA. Extracellular matrix cell adhesion peptides: functional applications in orthopedic materials. Tissue Eng. 2000;6(2):85–103.
Yongli C, et al. Conformational changes of fibrinogen adsorption onto hydroxyapatite and titanium oxide nanoparticles. J Colloid Interface Sci. 1999;214(1):38–45.
Roach P, Farrar D, Perry CC. Surface tailoring for controlled protein adsorption: effect of topography at the nanometer scale and chemistry. J Am Chem Soc. 2006;128(12):3939–45.
Roach P, et al. Surface strategies for control of neuronal cell adhesion: a review. Surf Sci Rep. 2010;65(6):145–73.
CrossRef Copyright information
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012