Evaluation of Viability and Cell Proliferation in Bone and Gingival on Dental Implant Fixtures with Active Sandblasted and Sandblasted Surfaces by the Cytotoxicity Test Method

Abstract:

In recent years, the technology of dental implants has advanced a lot and this has become one of the main reasons for dentists to refer to implants immediately after tooth extraction. Evaluation of cell survival in implantology studies to determine cell sensitivity determines the outcome of treatment. This study aimed to investigate the bone integration properties as well as the cytotoxicity between the implant surface and the jaw bone. In this study, cytotoxicity test was used to evaluate the toxicity and viability of sandblasted large grit acid etched, and sandblasted large grit acid etched active surfaces in 3A brand dental implants with G292 osteoblastic cells and human gingival fibroblasts cells are discussed. This operation was performed using a laboratory incubator of the German company MEMMERT for 24 hours, by neubauer lam cells counting for one hundred thousand cultured cells in each test at a temperature of 37 °C, a pressure of 1 atmosphere and 90% humidity. Based on the scanning electron microscopy images and the cytotoxicity test results, it can be seen that the bone graft of the implant, with the sandblasted large grit acid etched active surface treatment, is much better and also one week faster than the implant with the sandblasted large grit acid etched one. However, the viability of the implant with the sandblasted large grit acid etched active surface treatment for both G292 osteoblastic cells and human gingival fibroblasts cells samples was equal to 98.4% and 97.3%, respectively, and is lower than the sandblasted large grit acid etched surface treatment. The results show that the viability of the sandblasted large grit acid etched implant is about 1.5 to 2% higher than the sandblasted large grit acid etched active one, but the surface integrity of sandblasted large grit acid etched active is better than sandblasted large grit acid etched in all samples, and the treatment process is reduced by one week.

• Periodical: Journal of Biomimetics, Biomaterials and Biomedical Engineering (Volume 56)
• Pages: 165-172
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/p-gmmc8m
• Online since: May 2022
• Authors: Bijan Mohammadi, Ehsan Anbarzadeh*
• Keywords: Dental Implants, MTT, Surface Treatment, Viability

References

[1] M. Fanuscu, V. Hung, and P. Bernard, Implant biomechanics in grafted sinus: a finite element analysis., Journal of Oral Implantology, 30. 2, (2004) 59-68.

DOI: 10.1563/0.674.1

[2] B. Mohammadi, Z. Abdoli, and E. Anbarzadeh, Investigation of the Effect of Abutment Angle Tolerance on the Stress Created in the Fixture and Screw in Dental Implants Using Finite Element Analysis,. In Journal of Biomimetics, Biomaterials and Biomedical Engineering, Vol. 51, (2021) 63-76.

DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/jbbbe.51.63

[3] A. Bacchi, et al, Effect of framework material and vertical misfit on stress distribution in implant-supported partial prosthesis under load application: 3-D finite element analysis,. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica. 1;71(5), (2013) 1243-1249.

DOI: 10.3109/00016357.2012.757644

[4] A. A. Mamalis, S. S. Silvestros, Analysis of osteoblastic gene expression in the early human mesenchymal cell response to a chemically modified implant surface: an in vitro study,, Clinical oral implants research, 22(5), (2011) 530-537.

DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02049.x

[5] A. Kasim, et al, Development of porous Ti-6Al-4V dental implant by metal injection molding with palm stearin binder system., In Materials Science Forum, Trans Tech Publications Ltd. vol. 889, (2017) 79-83.

DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/msf.889.79

[6] A. Yodrux, Y. Nantakrit, and J. Manutchanok, Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Dental Implant Threads., In Applied Mechanics and Materials, vol. 876, (2018) 138-146.

DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.876.138

[7] K. T. Koo, et al, Implant surface decontamination by surgical treatment of periimplantitis: a literature review,, Implant dentistry, 28(2), (2019) 173-176.

DOI: 10.1097/id.0000000000000840

[8] S.M. Croitoru, I. Marinela, Study on Shape of Dental Implants., In Advanced Engineering Forum, vol. 34, (2019) 183-188.

DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/aef.34.183

[9] A. N. Natali, E. L. Carniel, and P.G. Pavan, Modelling of mandible bone properties in the numerical analysis of oral implant biomechanics,, Computer methods and programs in biomedicine, 1;100(2), (2010) 158-165.

DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2010.03.006

[10] M.D. Fabbro, et al, Tilted implants for the rehabilitation of edentulous jaws: a systematic review,, Clinical implant dentistry and related research, 14(4), (2012) 612-621.

DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00288.x

[11] T. H. Lan, et al, Biomechanical analysis of alveolar bone stress around implants with different thread designs and pitches in the mandibular molar area,, Clinical oral investigations, 1;16(2), (2012) 363-369.

DOI: 10.1007/s00784-011-0517-z

[12] J. C. Chen, et al, In vivo studies of titanium implant surface treatment by sandblasted, acid-etched and further anchored with ceramic of tetra calcium phosphate on osseointegration,,  Journal of the Australian Ceramic Society, 55(3), (2019) 799-806.

DOI: 10.1007/s41779-018-00292-5

[13] G. Le, et al, Osteoblastic cell behaviour on different titanium implant surfaces,, Acta Biomaterialia. 4(3), (2008) 535-543.

DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2007.12.002

[14] G. Strnad, C. Nicola, and J. F. Laszlo, Effect of surface preparation and passivation treatment on surface topography of Ti6Al4V for dental implants,, In Applied Mechanics and Materials, vol. 809, (2015) 513-518.

DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.809-810.513

[15] M. Stimmelmayr, et al, Wear at the titanium–titanium and the titanium–zirconia implant–abutment interface: a comparative in vitro study,, Dental Materials. 28(12), (2012) 1215-1220.

DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2012.08.008

[16] Q. Wang, et al, Multi-scale surface treatments of titanium implants for rapid osseointegration: a review,. Nanomaterials, 10(6), (2020) 1244-1274.

DOI: 10.3390/nano10061244

[17] M.A. Alfarsi, S.M. Hamlet, and S. Ivanovski, Titanium surface hydrophilicity enhances platelet activation,, Dental materials journal. 28, (2014) 2013-2021.

DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2013-221

[18] E.S. Kim, S.Y. Shin, Influence of the implant abutment types and the dynamic loading on initial screw loosening,, The journal of advanced prosthodontics, 5(1), (2013) 21-28.

DOI: 10.4047/jap.2013.5.1.21

[19] C. Morrison, et al, In vitro biocompatibility testing of polymers for orthopaedic implants using cultured fibroblasts and osteoblasts,. Biomaterials, 16(13), (1995) 987-992.

DOI: 10.1016/0142-9612(95)94906-2

[20] E. Conserva, M. Menini, G. Ravera, and P. Pera, The role of surface implant treatments on the biological behavior of SaOS‐2 osteoblast‐like cells,. An in vitro comparative study. Clinical oral implants research, 24(8), (2013) 880-889.

DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02397.x