| Title |
The role of well-defined nanotopography of titanium implants on osseointegration: cellular and molecular events in vivo
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s101294 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dimitrios Karazisis, Ahmed M Ballo, Sarunas Petronis, Hossein Agheli, Lena Emanuelsson, Peter Thomsen, Omar Omar |
| Abstract |
Mechanisms governing the cellular interactions with well-defined nanotopography are not well described in vivo. This is partly due to the difficulty in isolating a particular effect of nanotopography from other surface properties. This study employed colloidal lithography for nanofabrication on titanium implants in combination with an in vivo sampling procedure and different analytical techniques. The aim was to elucidate the effect of well-defined nanotopography on the molecular, cellular, and structural events of osseointegration. Titanium implants were nanopatterned (Nano) with semispherical protrusions using colloidal lithography. Implants, with and without nanotopography, were implanted in rat tibia and retrieved after 3, 6, and 28 days. Retrieved implants were evaluated using quantitative polymerase chain reaction, histology, immunohistochemistry, and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS). Surface characterization showed that the nanotopography was well defined in terms of shape (semispherical), size (79±6 nm), and distribution (31±2 particles/µm(2)). EDS showed similar levels of titanium, oxygen, and carbon for test and control implants, confirming similar chemistry. The molecular analysis of the retrieved implants revealed that the expression levels of the inflammatory cytokine, TNF-α, and the osteoclastic marker, CatK, were reduced in cells adherent to the Nano implants. This was consistent with the observation of less CD163-positive macrophages in the tissue surrounding the Nano implant. Furthermore, periostin immunostaining was frequently detected around the Nano implant, indicating higher osteogenic activity. This was supported by the EDS analysis of the retrieved implants showing higher content of calcium and phosphate on the Nano implants. The results show that Nano implants elicit less periimplant macrophage infiltration and downregulate the early expression of inflammatory (TNF-α) and osteoclastic (CatK) genes. Immunostaining and elemental analyses show higher osteogenic activity at the Nano implant. It is concluded that an implant with the present range of well-defined nanocues attenuates the inflammatory response while enhancing mineralization during osseointegration. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 85 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 12% |
| Researcher | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 26 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 24% |
| Materials Science | 13 | 15% |
| Engineering | 11 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 28 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 April 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,469
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,050
of 314,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#93
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,727 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.