Advanced Biomaterials and Devices in Medicine
About this Journal
Guide for Authors
Submit your Article
View Articles
Contact the Journal

Advanced Biomaterials and Devices in Medicine
June 2015, Volume 2, Issue 1, pp 10-22

The effect of titanium dental implant surfaces with varying microtopography on the temporal expression of the osteogenic phenotype in vitro

C. Knabe1*, I. Naumann1, A. Houshmand2, M.A. Lopez-Heredia1, M. Stiller1,2, T. Niem3, B. Wostmann3, A. Hubner3, C. Muller-Mai4

1 Department of Experimental Orofacial Medicine, Philipps University Marburg, School of Dental Medicine, Marburg, 35039 Germany
2 Department of Maxillofacial and Facial-Plastic Surgery, Division of Oral Medicine, Radiology and Surgery, Charite-University, Medical Center Berlin, Berlin, 10117 Germany
3 Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, Justus Liebig University Giessen, Giessen, 35930 Germany
4 Department of Traumatology and Orthopaedics, Hospital for Special Surgery, Lünen, 44534 Germany

* Corresponding author: Prof. Christine Knabe, e-mail:

Over the past 15 years, titanium implant surfaces, which exhibit two superimposed levels of surface roughness, have received increasing attention in implant dentistry in view of accelerating the osseous integration of dental implants. However, there are few studies, which compare the biological behavior of a range of these clinically used implant surfaces with varying mixed microtopography to each other. This study aimed at establishing the relationship between the surface properties of an array of clinically used titanium implant surfaces with varying mixed microtopography and their osteogenic potential. Type I collagen (Col I), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), osteopontin (OP), osteocalcin (OC), osteonectin (ON) and bone sialoprotein (BSP) are valuable markers for evaluating the osteogenic potential of endosseous implant materials. This study analyzed Col I, ALP, OP, OC, ON and BSP expression by SaOS-2 bone cells cultured on various implant surfaces with mixed microtopography for 3, 7, 14 and 21 days. Test materials were titanium disks with Cellplus® (CP), Promote® (Pro), SLA® (SLA), Titanium plasma-sprayed (TPS) and Osseotite® (Oss) surfaces. Machined Ti (MTi) was used as control. All surfaces supported cell proliferation, differentiation and extracellular matrix formation and mineralization. The SLA surface had the greatest stimulatory effect on osteoblast proliferation and differentiation; suggesting that this surface possesses the highest potency to enhance osteogenesis. This study shows that slight differences in surface microarchitectural features have a significant effect on the osteogenic phenotype expression in vitro. These differences are likely to influence the implant in vivo performance in patients.

Keywords: titanium dental implants, implant surfaces, microarchitecture, surface properties, SaOS-2, osteogenic phenotype, osteoblast, cell differentiation, bone

Home | About this Journal | Guide for Authors | Submit your Article | View Articles | Contact the Journal |