Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine
Volume 6, Issue 1 , Pages 35-43 , February 2010

Osteoblasts response to microstructured and nanostructured polyimide film, processed by the use of silica bead microlenses

  • Muriel Voisin, MS

      Affiliations

    • Biomaterials Group, National Centre for Biomedical Engineering Science, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
    • ,
  • Michael Ball, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Materials, Imperial College, London, England
    • ,
  • Claire O'Connell, MSc

      Affiliations

    • National Centre for Laser Application, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
    • ,
  • Richard Sherlock, PhD

      Affiliations

    • National Centre for Laser Application, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author: National Centre for Laser Application, National University of Ireland, Galway, University Road, Co. Galway, Ireland.

Received 16 April 2008 ,Accepted 19 May 2009.

References 

  1. Esposito M, Hirsch J-M, Lekholm U, Thomsen P. Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants (I) Success criteria and epidemiology and (II) etiopathogenesis. Eur J Oral Sci. 1998;106:527-51, and 721-64.
  2. Sato Y, Tanizawa K, Manns F, Parel JMA, Murahara MM. Laser induced photochemical surface modification of PMMA for fibrin free intraocular lens. Proc SPIE Ophthalmol Technol XIII. 2003;4951:92–103
  3. Abela-Formanek C, Amon M, Schild G, Schauersberger J, Heinze G, Kruger A. Uveal and capsular biocompatibility of hydrophilic acrylic, hydrophobic acrylic, and silicone intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002;28:50–61
  4. Eliopoulos N, Lejeune L, Martineau D, Galipeau J. Human-compatible collagen matrix for prolonged and reversible systemic delivery of erythropoietin in mice from gene-modified marrow stroma. Cells Mol Ther. 2004;10:741–748
  5. Begley CT, Doherty MJ, Mollan RA, Wilson DJ. Comparative study of the osteoinductive properties of bioceramic, coral and processed bone graft substitutes. Biomaterials. 1995;16:1181–1185
  6. Yoon JS, Lew H, Kim SJ, Lee SY. Exposure rate of hydroxyapatite orbital implants: a 15-year experience of 802 cases. Ophthalmology. 2008;115(3):566–572e.2
  7. Beckham CA, Greenlee TK, Crebo AR. Bone formation at a ceramic implant interface. Calcif Tissue Int. 1971;8:165–171
  8. Suzuki T, Jinno S, Hattori N, Okeya H, Ishikawa A, Deguchi M, et al. The biological properties of a novel ethyl methacrylate resin. J Int Med Res. 2006;34:256–263
  9. Llewellyn-Thomas E, Wang PY, Cannon JS. Adhesion of synthetic organic polymer on soft tissue. I. A fast setting polyurethane adhesive. J Biomed Mater Res. 2004;8:35–43
  10. Webster TJ, Ergun C, Doremus RH, Lanford WA. Increased osteoblast adhesion on titanium-coated hydroxylapatite that forms CaTiO3. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2003;67A:975–980
  11. Svehla M, Morberg P, Bruce W, Zicat B, Walsh WR. The effect of substrate roughness and hydroxyapatite coating thickness on implant shear strength. J Arthroplasty. 2002;12:304–311
  12. Klokkevold PR, Johnson P, Dadgostari S, Caputo A, Davies JE, Nishimura ND. Early endosseous integration enhanced by dual acid etching of titanium: a torque removal study in rabbit. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2001;12:350–357
  13. Brunette DM, Chehroudi B. The effects of the surface topography of micromachined titanium substrata on cell behavior in vitro and in vivo. J Biomech Eng-Trans ASME. 1999;34:279–290
  14. Burridge K, Chrzanowska-Wodnicka M. Focal adhesions, contractility and signaling. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 1996;12:463–519
  15. Yim E, Reano R, Pang S, Yee A, Chen C, Leong K. Nanopatterned-induced changes in morphology and motility of smooth muscle cells. Biomaterials. 2005;26:5405–5413
  16. Zhu B, Lu Q, Yin J, Hu J, Wang Z. Alignment of osteoblast-like cells and cell- produced collagen matrix induced by nanogrooves. Tissue Eng. 2005;11:825–834
  17. Prendergast U, O'Connell C, Sherlock R, Ball M, O'Connor G, Glynn T. Excimer laser and lamp-based techniques applied to the nanostructuring of biomaterials. Laser materials processing. Proc SPIE. 2005;5827:498–504
  18. Ball M, Prendergast U, O'Connell C, Sherlock R. Comparison of cell interactions with laser machined micron- and nanoscale features in polymer. Exp Mol Pathol. 2007;82:130–134
  19. In:  Goodman SH,  Goodman S editor. Handbook of thermoset plastics. 2nd ed.. Westwood (NJ): Noyes Publ; 1998;
  20. Denk R, Piglmayer K, Bauerle D. Laser-induced nano-patterning by means of interference subpatterns generated by microspheres. Appl Phys A. 2003;76:1–3
  21. Denk R, Piglmayer K, Bauerle D. Laser-induced etching and deposition of W using a-SiO2 microspheres. Appl Phys A. 2003;76:549–550
  22. Piglmayer K, Denk R, Bauerle D. Laser-induced surface patterning by means of microspheres. Appl Phys Lett. 2002;80:4693–4695
  23. Rodan SB, Imai Y, Thiede MA, Wesolowski G, Thompson D, Bar-Shavit Z, et al. Characterization of human osteosarcoma cell line (Saos-2) with osteoblastic properties. Cancer Res. 1987;47:4961–4966
  24. Kartsogiannis V, Wah Ng K. Cell lines and primary cell cultures in the study of bone cell biology. Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2004;228:79–102
  25. Timmins M. BD oxygen biosensor vs. existing methods of measuring toxicology. Technical bulletin 449, BD Biosciences Discovery Labware. Bedford (Mass): BD Biosciences. http://www.bdsciences.com
  26. Bessey O, Lowry O, Brock M. A method for the rapid determination of alkaline phosphatase with five cubic millimeters of serum. J Biol Chem. 1946;164:321–329
  27. Boyan B, Lossdorfer S, Wang L, Zhao G. Osteoblasts generate an osteogenic microenvironment when grown on surfaces with rough microtopographies. Eur Cell. Mater. 2003;5:11–12
  28. Boyan B, Lohmann C, Dean D, Sylvia V, Cochran D, Schwartz Z. Mechanisms involved in osteoblast response to implant surface morphology. Annu Rev Mater Res. 2001;31:357–371
  29. Martin J, Schwartz Z, Hummert T, Schraub D, Simpson J, Lankford J, et al. Effect of titanium surface roughness on proliferation, differentiation, and protein synthesis of human osteoblast-like cells (MG63). J Biomed Mater Res. 1995;29:389–401
  30. Masaki C, Schneider G, Zaharias R, Seabold D, Stanford C. Effects of implant surface microtopography on osteoblast gene expression. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2005;16:650–656
  31. Rompen E, Domken D, Degidi M, Farias Pontes A, Piatelli A. The effect of material characteristics, of surface topography and of implant components and connections on soft tissue integration: a literature review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006;17:55–67
  32. Hart A, Gadegaard N, Wilkinson C, Oreffo R, Dalby M. Osteoprogenitor response to low adhesion nanotopographies originally fabricated by electron beam lithography. J Mater Sci. 2007;18:1211–1218
  33. Curtis A, Wilkinson C. Topographical control of cells. Biomaterials. 1997;18:1573–1583
  34. Rice J, Hunt J, Gallagher J, Hanarp P, Sutherland D, Gold J. Quantitative assessment of the response of primary derived human osteoblasts and macrophages to a range of nanotopography surfaces in a single culture model in vitro. Biomaterials. 2003;24:4799–4818
  35. Lenhert S, Meier MB, Meyer U, Chi L, Wiesmann HP. Osteoblast alignment, elongation and migration on grooved polystyrene surfaces patterned by Langmuir-Blodgett lithography. Biomaterials. 2005;26:563–570
  36. Matsuzaka K, Walboomers F, De Ruijter A, Jansen JA. Effect of microgrooved poly-l-lactic (pla) surfaces on proliferation, cytoskeletal organization, and mineralized matrix formation of rat bone marrow cells. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11:325–333
  37. Rhiele M, Dalby M, Johnstone H, MacIntosh A, Affrossman S. Cell behaviour of rat calvaria bone cells on surfaces with random nanometric features. Mater Sci Eng. 2003;C23:340–377
  38. Dalby MJ, Giannaras D, Riehle MO, Gadegaard N, Affrossman S, Curtis ASG. Rapid fibroblast adhesion to 27 nm high polymer demixed nano-topography. Biomaterials. 2004;25:77–83
  39. Bershadsky A, Ballestrem C, Carramusa L, Zilberman Y, Gilquin B, Khochbin S, et al. Assembly and mechanosensory function of focal adhesions: experiments and models. Eur J Cell Biol. 2006;85:165–173
  40. Chen C, Alonso J, Ostuni E, Whitesides G, Ingber D. Cell shape provides global control of focal adhesion assembly. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2003;307:355–361
  41. Nicolas A, Geiger B, Safran S. Cell mechanosensivity controls the anisotropy of focal adhesions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101:12520–12525
  42. Pavalko F, Norvell S, Burr D, Turner C, Duncan R, Bidwell J. A model for mechanotransduction in bone cells: the load-bearing mechanosomes. J Cell Biochem. 2003;88:104–112
  43. De Mali K. Vinculin—a dynamic regulator of cell adhesion. Trends Biochem Sci. 2004;29:565–567
  44. Steimle P, Hoffert J, Adey N, Craig S. Polyphosphoinositides inhibit the interaction of vinculin with actin filaments. J Biol Chem. 1999;26:18414–18420
  45. Czech MP. PiP2 and PiP3: complex roles at the cell surface. Cell. 2000;100:603–606
  46. Owen G, Meredith D, Gwynn I, Richards R. Focal adhesion quantification—a new assay of material biocompatibility?. [review] Eur Cell Mater. 2005;9:85–96
  47. Khatiwala C, Peyton S, Putnam A. Intrinsic mechanical properties of the extra cellular matrix affect the behaviour of pre-osteoblastic MC3T3-e1 cells. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2006;290:C1640–C1650
  48. Galbraith G, Yamada K, Sheetz M. The relationship between force and focal complex development. J Cell Biol. 2002;159:695–705
  49. Bakolitsa C, Cohen D, Bankston L, Bobkov AA, Cadwell GW, Jennings L, et al. Structural basis for vinculin activation at sites of cell adhesion. Nature. 2004;430:583–586

 The work was supported by Enterprise Ireland under grant number CFTD/2003/413.

PII: S1549-9634(09)00105-1

doi: 10.1016/j.nano.2009.05.007

Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine
Volume 6, Issue 1 , Pages 35-43 , February 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution