Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Jan 27;12:925-934.
doi: 10.2147/IJN.S126248. eCollection 2017.

Synergistic Effect of Nanotopography and Bioactive Ions on Peri-Implant Bone Response

Affiliations
Free PMC article

Synergistic Effect of Nanotopography and Bioactive Ions on Peri-Implant Bone Response

Yingmin Su et al. Int J Nanomedicine. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

Both bioactive ion chemistry and nanoscale surface modifications are beneficial for enhanced osseointegration of endosseous implants. In this study, a facile synthesis approach to the incorporation of bioactive Ca2+ ions into the interlayers of nanoporous structures (Ca-nano) formed on a Ti6Al4V alloy surface was developed by sequential chemical and heat treatments. Samples with a machined surface and an Na+ ion-incorporated nanoporous surface (Na-nano) fabricated by concentrated alkali and heat treatment were used in parallel for comparison. The bone response was investigated by microcomputed tomography assessment, sequential fluorescent labeling analysis, and histological and histomorphometric evaluation after 8 weeks of implantation in rat femurs. No significant differences were found in the nanotopography, surface roughness, or crystalline properties of the Ca-nano and Na-nano surfaces. Bone-implant contact was better in the Ca-nano and Na-nano implants than in the machined implant. The Ca-nano implant was superior to the Na-nano implant in terms of enhancing the volume of new bone formation. The bone formation activity consistently increased for the Ca-nano implant but ceased for the Na-nano implant in the late healing stage. These results suggest that Ca-nano implants have promising potential for application in dentistry and orthopedics.

Keywords: bioactive ion; nanotopography; osseointegration; osteoinduction; surface modification.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
SEM micrographs and AFM images of specimens with machined and nanostructured surfaces. Notes: (A and D) Machined surface, (B and E) Na+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface, and (C and F) Ca2+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface. Abbreviations: AFM, atomic force microscopy; SEM, scanning electron microscopy.
Figure 2
Figure 2
XPS survey spectra of Ti6Al4V alloy specimens with different surfaces. Abbreviations: AU, arbitrary unit; Ca-nano, Ca2+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface; Machined, machined surface; Na-nano, Na+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface; XPS, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy.
Figure 3
Figure 3
XRD patterns collected from samples with three different surfaces. Abbreviations: Ca-nano, Ca2+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface; Machined, machined surface; Na-nano, Na+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface; XRD, X-ray powder diffraction.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Transverse micro-CT reconstructed images of proximal tibiae showing the status of the Ti6Al4V implant (red) and the response of bone (green) at 8 weeks after implantation. Notes: (A) Machined surface, (B) Na+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface, and (C) Ca2+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface. Abbreviation: CT, computed tomography.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Micro-CT quantitative evaluation within the ROI. Notes: *P<0.01 vs Machined; #P<0.05 vs Na-nano. (A) Bone volume fraction of the three groups, (B) Tb.N of the three groups, (C) Tb.Th of the three groups, and (D) Tb.Sp of the three groups. Error bars represent standard deviation. Abbreviations: BV/TV, bone volume/total volume; Ca-nano, Ca2+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface; Machined, machined surface; micro-CT, microcomputed tomography; Na-nano, Na+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface; ROI, region of interest; Tb.N, trabecular number; Tb.Sp, trabecular separation; Tb.Th, trabecular thickness.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Histological sections with Villanueva bone stain showing the morphology of the bone tissue around the implant (black) at different magnifications. Notes: Partial magnifications of the yellow rectangular area are displayed in the lower panel. (A and D) Machined surface, (B and E) Na+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface, and (C and F) Ca2+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface. Osteoblasts (marked with red triangles) are lining the surface of the osteoid (marked with red arrow).
Figure 7
Figure 7
Histomorphometric analysis of peri-implant tissue. Notes: *P<0.05 vs machined and #P<0.05 vs Na-nano. (A) Percentage of new bone formation (BA) and (B) percentage of direct BIC. Error bars represent standard deviation. Abbreviations: BA, bone area ratio; BIC, bone–implant contact; Ca-nano, Ca2+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface; Machined, machined surface; Na-nano, Na+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Merged fluorescent images of alloy implants with different surfaces showing blue (oxytetracycline hydrochloride, 1 week), red (alizarin red S, 4 weeks), and green (calcein, 8 weeks) fluorescent dyes. Notes: (A) Machined surface, (B) Na+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface, and (C) Ca2+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Fluorescence labeling analysis of new bone formation at (A) 1 week, (B) 4 weeks, and (C) 8 weeks after implantation. Notes: *P<0.05 vs Machined and #P<0.05 vs Na-nano. Error bars represent standard deviation. Abbreviations: Ca-nano, Ca2+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface; LBA, labeled bone area; Machined, machined surface; Na-nano, Na+ ion-incorporated nanostructured surface.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 3 articles

References

    1. Duraccio D, Mussano F, Faga MG. Biomaterials for dental implants: current and future trends. J Mater Sci. 2015;50(14):4779–4812.
    1. Shibata Y, Tanimoto Y. A review of improved fixation methods for dental implants. part I: surface optimization for rapid osseointegration. J Prosthodont Res. 2015;59(1):20–33. - PubMed
    1. Wennerberg A, Jimbo R, Albrektsson T. Implant Surfaces and their Biological and Clinical Impact. Springer; Berlin Heidelberg; 2015. Implant surfaces and their biological and clinical impact.
    1. Jemat A, Ghazali MJ, Razali M, Otsuka Y. Surface modifications and their effects on titanium dental implants. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nayab SN, Jones FH, Olsen I. Human alveolar bone cell adhesion and growth on ion-implanted titanium. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2004;69(4):651–657. - PubMed
Feedback