Interactions between endothelial progenitor cells (EPC) and titanium implant surfaces
- 627 Downloads
Endothelial cells play an important role in peri-implant angiogenesis during early bone formation. Therefore, interactions between endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) and titanium dental implant surfaces are of crucial interest. The aim of our in vitro study was to investigate the reactions of EPCs in contact with different commercially available implant surfaces.
Materials and methods
EPCs from buffy coats were isolated by Ficoll density gradient separation. After cell differentiation, EPC were cultured for a period of 7 days on different titanium surfaces. The test surfaces varied in roughness and hydrophilicity: acid-etched (A), sand-blasted-blasted and acid-etched (SLA), hydrophilic A (modA), and hydrophilic SLA (modSLA). Plastic and fibronectin-coated plastic surfaces served as controls. Cell numbers and morphology were analyzed by confocal laser scanning microscopy. Secretion of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and expressions of iNOS and eNOS were investigated by real-time polymerase chain reaction.
Cell numbers were higher in the control groups compared to the cells of titanium surfaces. Initially, hydrophilic titanium surfaces (modA and modSLA) showed lower cell numbers than hydrophobic surfaces (A and SLA). After 7 days smoother surfaces (A and modA) showed increased cell numbers compared to rougher surfaces (SLA and modSLA). Cell morphology of A, modA, and control surfaces was characterized by a multitude of pseudopodia and planar cell soma architecture. SLA and modSLA promoted small and plump cell soma with little quantity of pseudopodia. The lowest VEGF level was measured on A, the highest on modSLA. The highest eNOS and iNOS expressions were found on modA surfaces.
The results of this study demonstrate that biological behaviors of EPCs can be influenced by different surfaces. The modSLA surface promotes an undifferentiated phenotype of EPCs that has the ability to secrete growth factors in great quantities.
In correlation with recent clinical studies these results underline the hypothesis that EPC could promote and increase neovascularization by secreting paracrine factors which support osseointegration of dental implants.
KeywordsEndothelial progenitor cell EPC Stem cell Titanium implant surface SLA SLActive Hydrophilicity
We thank Kathy Taylor for orthographic correction of the article.
Conflict of interest statement
This study was supported by the ITI Foundation for the Promotion of Implantology, Basel, Switzerland, 08/2008 (Dr. Thomas Ziebart).
- 4.Klein MO, Bijelic A, Toyoshima T, Götz H, von Koppenfels RL, Al-Nawas B et al (2010) Longterm response of osteogenic cells on micron and submicron-scale-structured hydrophilic titanium surfaces: sequence of cell proliferation and cell differentiation. Clin Oral Implants Res 21:642–649PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Ahmadi H, Baharvand H, Ashtiani SK, Soleimani M, Sadeghian H, Ardekani JM et al (2007) Safety analysis and improved cardiac function following local autologous transplantation of CD133(+) enriched bone marrow cells after myocardial infarction. Curr Neurovasc Res 4:153–160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Dimmeler S, Zeiher A (2005) Stammzelltherapie in der kardiologie: stand und perspektiven. Uni-Med, BremenGoogle Scholar
- 36.An N, Schedle A, Wieland M, Andrukhov O, Matejka M, Rausch-Fan X (2010) Proliferation, behavior, and cytokine gene expression of human umbilical vascular endothelial cells in response to different titanium surfaces. J Biomed Mater Res 93:364–372Google Scholar
- 49.Zhang Y, Andrukhov O, Berner S, Matejka M, Wieland M, Rausch-Fan X et al (2010) Osteogenic properties of hydrophilic and hydrophobic titanium surfaces evaluated with osteoblast- like cells (MG63) in coculture with human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC). Dent Mater 26:1043–1051PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar