IADR Abstract Archives
Interactions of Osteoprogenitor Cells with a Novel Zirconia Implant Surface
Objectives: This study evaluated the in-vitro response of a mouse pre-osteoblast cell line on a novel, sandblasted zirconia surface compared to titanium.
Methods: The novel zirconia surface was created by sandblasting at 6cm with 150-200μm alumina particles under 0.6MPa pressure, for 3 minutes. MC3T3-E1 subclone 4 osteoblast precursor cell line was cultured on either sandblasted titanium (SBCpTi) or sandblasted zirconia (SBY-TZP). The surface topography was analysed by three-dimensional laser microscopy measurements and scanning electron microscope. The chemical state of each surface was also assessed using wettability measurements. The cellular response was quantified by morphology (day 1), proliferation (day 1, 3, 5, 7, 9), viability (day 1, 9) and migration (0, 6, 24 hours).
Results: The sandblasting surface treatment was successful for both titanium and zirconia, increasing surface roughness and obtaining a defined surface topography, however, titanium was able to achieve a more apparent nano-topography. The wettability of the two surfaces showed no significant difference. The zirconia surface resulted in improved cellular spreading and a significantly increased rate of migration compared to titanium. However, cellular proliferation and viability of the cell line was not significantly different on the two surfaces.
Conclusions: The novel, roughened zirconia surface elicited cell stimulating properties comparable or exceeding that of titanium. Therefore, this novel zirconia surface can be an acceptable substitute for titanium as a dental implant material. Further in vitro and in vivo animal studies would be important to further assess zirconia and this novel surface as suitable for dental implants and an alternative to titanium-based dental implants; prior to clinical studies.
Methods: The novel zirconia surface was created by sandblasting at 6cm with 150-200μm alumina particles under 0.6MPa pressure, for 3 minutes. MC3T3-E1 subclone 4 osteoblast precursor cell line was cultured on either sandblasted titanium (SBCpTi) or sandblasted zirconia (SBY-TZP). The surface topography was analysed by three-dimensional laser microscopy measurements and scanning electron microscope. The chemical state of each surface was also assessed using wettability measurements. The cellular response was quantified by morphology (day 1), proliferation (day 1, 3, 5, 7, 9), viability (day 1, 9) and migration (0, 6, 24 hours).
Results: The sandblasting surface treatment was successful for both titanium and zirconia, increasing surface roughness and obtaining a defined surface topography, however, titanium was able to achieve a more apparent nano-topography. The wettability of the two surfaces showed no significant difference. The zirconia surface resulted in improved cellular spreading and a significantly increased rate of migration compared to titanium. However, cellular proliferation and viability of the cell line was not significantly different on the two surfaces.
Conclusions: The novel, roughened zirconia surface elicited cell stimulating properties comparable or exceeding that of titanium. Therefore, this novel zirconia surface can be an acceptable substitute for titanium as a dental implant material. Further in vitro and in vivo animal studies would be important to further assess zirconia and this novel surface as suitable for dental implants and an alternative to titanium-based dental implants; prior to clinical studies.