4.8 Article

Biomimetic modification of titanium dental implant model surfaces using the RGDSP-peptide sequence: A cell morphology study

Journal

BIOMATERIALS
Volume 27, Issue 21, Pages 4003-4015

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.03.009

Keywords

titanium oxide; surface topography; surface modification; biomimetic material; peptide; cell morphology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Surface topography and (bio)chemistry are key factors in determining cell response to an implant. We investigated cell adhesion and spreading patterns of epithelial cells, fibroblasts and osteoblasts on biomimetically modified, smooth and rough titanium Surfaces. The RGD bioactive peptide sequence was immobilized via a non-fouling poly((L)-lysine)-graft-poly(ethylene glycol) (PLL-g-PEG) molecular assembly system, which allowed exploitation of specific cell-peptide interactions even in the presence of serum. As control surfaces, bare titanium and bio-inactive surfaces (scrambled RDG and unfunctionalized PLL-g-PEG) were used. Our findings demonstrated that surface topography and chemistry directly influenced the attachment and morphology of all cell types tested. In general, an increase in cell number and more spread cells were observed on bioactive substrates (containing RGD) compared to bio-inactive surfaces. More fibroblasts were present on smooth than on rough topographies, whereas for osteoblasts the opposite tendency was observed. Epithelial cell attachment did not follow any regular pattern. Footprint areas for all cell types were significantly reduced on rough compared to smooth surfaces. Osteoblast attachment and footprint areas increased with increasing RGD-peptide surface density. However, no synergy (interaction) between RGD-peptide surface density and surface topography was observed for osteoblasts neither in terms of attachment nor footprint area. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available