Human osteoblasts response to different dental implant abutment materials: An in-vitro study
This study aimed to investigate human osteoblasts (HOB) response towards different dental implant abutment materials. Five dental implant abutment materials were investigated: (1) titanium (Ti), (2) titanium coated nitride (TiN), (3) cobalt chromium (CoCr), (4) zirconia (ZrO₂), and (5) modified poly...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Dental materials 2022-09, Vol.38 (9), p.1547-1557 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1557 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 9 |
| container_start_page | 1547 |
| container_title | Dental materials |
| container_volume | 38 |
| creator | Osman, Muataz A. Alamoush, Rasha A. Kushnerev, Evgeny Seymour, Kevin.G. Shawcross, Susan Yates, Julian M. |
| description | This study aimed to investigate human osteoblasts (HOB) response towards different dental implant abutment materials.
Five dental implant abutment materials were investigated: (1) titanium (Ti), (2) titanium coated nitride (TiN), (3) cobalt chromium (CoCr), (4) zirconia (ZrO₂), and (5) modified polyether ether ketone (m-PEEK). HOBs were cultured, expanded, and seeded according to the supplier’s protocol (PromoCell, UK). Cell proliferation and cytotoxicity were evaluated at days 1, 3, 5, and 10 using Alamar Blue (alamarBlue) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) colorimetric assays. Data were analysed via two-way ANOVA, one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test (significance was determined as p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.dental.2022.07.005 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2697095976</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0109564122002184</els_id><sourcerecordid>2697095976</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c339t-8ee4f1b4c974664c4b888ca4d2df45c28edc03ed0dd51bda0b6457d1a6e13efa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UE1LxDAQDaLguvoPPOTopXXSph_xICyLusKCF70JIU2mkKVtapIu7L-3Sz17GmbmvTfzHiH3DFIGrHw8pAaHqLo0gyxLoUoBiguyYnUlEgBRXZIVMBBJUXJ2TW5COAAAzwRbke_d1KuBuhDRNZ0KMVCPYXRDQBodNbZt0c_idLlAbT92am5VM8X-PO9VRG9VF57oZqB2SI42ekdDnMzplly18wbv_uqafL2-fG53yf7j7X272Sc6z0VMakTesoZrUfGy5Jo3dV1rxU1mWl7orEajIUcDxhSsMQqakheVYapElmOr8jV5WHRH734mDFH2Nmjs5k_RTUFmpahAFKIqZyhfoNq7EDy2cvS2V_4kGchzmPIgF6vyHKaESs5hzrTnhYazjaNFL4O2OGg01qOO0jj7v8AvJFeB1A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2697095976</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Human osteoblasts response to different dental implant abutment materials: An in-vitro study</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Osman, Muataz A. ; Alamoush, Rasha A. ; Kushnerev, Evgeny ; Seymour, Kevin.G. ; Shawcross, Susan ; Yates, Julian M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Osman, Muataz A. ; Alamoush, Rasha A. ; Kushnerev, Evgeny ; Seymour, Kevin.G. ; Shawcross, Susan ; Yates, Julian M.</creatorcontrib><description>This study aimed to investigate human osteoblasts (HOB) response towards different dental implant abutment materials.
Five dental implant abutment materials were investigated: (1) titanium (Ti), (2) titanium coated nitride (TiN), (3) cobalt chromium (CoCr), (4) zirconia (ZrO₂), and (5) modified polyether ether ketone (m-PEEK). HOBs were cultured, expanded, and seeded according to the supplier’s protocol (PromoCell, UK). Cell proliferation and cytotoxicity were evaluated at days 1, 3, 5, and 10 using Alamar Blue (alamarBlue) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) colorimetric assays. Data were analysed via two-way ANOVA, one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test (significance was determined as p < 0.05 for all tests).
All the investigated materials showed high and comparable initial proliferation activities apart from ZrO₂ (46.92%), with P% of 79.91%, 68.77%, 73.20%, and 65.46% for Ti, TiN, CoCr, and m-PEEK, respectively. At day 10, all materials exhibited comparable and lower P% than day 1 apart from TiN (70.90%) with P% of 30.22%, 40.64%, 37.27%, and 50.65% for Ti, CoCr, ZrO₂, and m-PEEK, respectively. The cytotoxic effect of the investigated materials was generally low throughout the whole experiment. At day 10, the cytotoxicity % was 7.63%, 0.21%, 13.30%, 5.32%, 8.60% for Ti, TiN, CoCr, ZrO₂, and m-PEEK. The Two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s Multiple Comparison Method highlighted significant material and time effects on cell proliferation and cytotoxicity, and a significant interaction (p < 0.0001) between the tested materials. Notably, TiN and m-PEEK showed improved HOB proliferation activity and cytotoxic levels than the other investigated materials. In addition, a non-significant negative correlation between viability and cytotoxicity was found for all tested materials. Ti (p = 0.07), TiN (p = 0.28), CoCr (p = 0.15), ZrO₂ (p = 0.17), and m-PEEK (p = 0.12).
All the investigated materials showed excellent biocompatibility properties with more promising results for the newly introduced TiN and m-PEEK as alternatives to the traditionally used dental implant and abutment materials.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0109-5641</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1879-0097</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-0097</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2022.07.005</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Cell proliferation ; Cobalt chromium ; Cytotoxicity ; Dental implant materials ; Human osteoblasts ; Modified polyether ether ketone ; Polyether ether ketone ; Titanium ; Titanium nitride ; Zirconia</subject><ispartof>Dental materials, 2022-09, Vol.38 (9), p.1547-1557</ispartof><rights>2022 The Author(s)</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c339t-8ee4f1b4c974664c4b888ca4d2df45c28edc03ed0dd51bda0b6457d1a6e13efa3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c339t-8ee4f1b4c974664c4b888ca4d2df45c28edc03ed0dd51bda0b6457d1a6e13efa3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2022.07.005$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Osman, Muataz A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alamoush, Rasha A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kushnerev, Evgeny</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seymour, Kevin.G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shawcross, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yates, Julian M.</creatorcontrib><title>Human osteoblasts response to different dental implant abutment materials: An in-vitro study</title><title>Dental materials</title><description>This study aimed to investigate human osteoblasts (HOB) response towards different dental implant abutment materials.
Five dental implant abutment materials were investigated: (1) titanium (Ti), (2) titanium coated nitride (TiN), (3) cobalt chromium (CoCr), (4) zirconia (ZrO₂), and (5) modified polyether ether ketone (m-PEEK). HOBs were cultured, expanded, and seeded according to the supplier’s protocol (PromoCell, UK). Cell proliferation and cytotoxicity were evaluated at days 1, 3, 5, and 10 using Alamar Blue (alamarBlue) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) colorimetric assays. Data were analysed via two-way ANOVA, one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test (significance was determined as p < 0.05 for all tests).
All the investigated materials showed high and comparable initial proliferation activities apart from ZrO₂ (46.92%), with P% of 79.91%, 68.77%, 73.20%, and 65.46% for Ti, TiN, CoCr, and m-PEEK, respectively. At day 10, all materials exhibited comparable and lower P% than day 1 apart from TiN (70.90%) with P% of 30.22%, 40.64%, 37.27%, and 50.65% for Ti, CoCr, ZrO₂, and m-PEEK, respectively. The cytotoxic effect of the investigated materials was generally low throughout the whole experiment. At day 10, the cytotoxicity % was 7.63%, 0.21%, 13.30%, 5.32%, 8.60% for Ti, TiN, CoCr, ZrO₂, and m-PEEK. The Two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s Multiple Comparison Method highlighted significant material and time effects on cell proliferation and cytotoxicity, and a significant interaction (p < 0.0001) between the tested materials. Notably, TiN and m-PEEK showed improved HOB proliferation activity and cytotoxic levels than the other investigated materials. In addition, a non-significant negative correlation between viability and cytotoxicity was found for all tested materials. Ti (p = 0.07), TiN (p = 0.28), CoCr (p = 0.15), ZrO₂ (p = 0.17), and m-PEEK (p = 0.12).
All the investigated materials showed excellent biocompatibility properties with more promising results for the newly introduced TiN and m-PEEK as alternatives to the traditionally used dental implant and abutment materials.</description><subject>Cell proliferation</subject><subject>Cobalt chromium</subject><subject>Cytotoxicity</subject><subject>Dental implant materials</subject><subject>Human osteoblasts</subject><subject>Modified polyether ether ketone</subject><subject>Polyether ether ketone</subject><subject>Titanium</subject><subject>Titanium nitride</subject><subject>Zirconia</subject><issn>0109-5641</issn><issn>1879-0097</issn><issn>1879-0097</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9UE1LxDAQDaLguvoPPOTopXXSph_xICyLusKCF70JIU2mkKVtapIu7L-3Sz17GmbmvTfzHiH3DFIGrHw8pAaHqLo0gyxLoUoBiguyYnUlEgBRXZIVMBBJUXJ2TW5COAAAzwRbke_d1KuBuhDRNZ0KMVCPYXRDQBodNbZt0c_idLlAbT92am5VM8X-PO9VRG9VF57oZqB2SI42ekdDnMzplly18wbv_uqafL2-fG53yf7j7X272Sc6z0VMakTesoZrUfGy5Jo3dV1rxU1mWl7orEajIUcDxhSsMQqakheVYapElmOr8jV5WHRH734mDFH2Nmjs5k_RTUFmpahAFKIqZyhfoNq7EDy2cvS2V_4kGchzmPIgF6vyHKaESs5hzrTnhYazjaNFL4O2OGg01qOO0jj7v8AvJFeB1A</recordid><startdate>202209</startdate><enddate>202209</enddate><creator>Osman, Muataz A.</creator><creator>Alamoush, Rasha A.</creator><creator>Kushnerev, Evgeny</creator><creator>Seymour, Kevin.G.</creator><creator>Shawcross, Susan</creator><creator>Yates, Julian M.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202209</creationdate><title>Human osteoblasts response to different dental implant abutment materials: An in-vitro study</title><author>Osman, Muataz A. ; Alamoush, Rasha A. ; Kushnerev, Evgeny ; Seymour, Kevin.G. ; Shawcross, Susan ; Yates, Julian M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c339t-8ee4f1b4c974664c4b888ca4d2df45c28edc03ed0dd51bda0b6457d1a6e13efa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Cell proliferation</topic><topic>Cobalt chromium</topic><topic>Cytotoxicity</topic><topic>Dental implant materials</topic><topic>Human osteoblasts</topic><topic>Modified polyether ether ketone</topic><topic>Polyether ether ketone</topic><topic>Titanium</topic><topic>Titanium nitride</topic><topic>Zirconia</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Osman, Muataz A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alamoush, Rasha A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kushnerev, Evgeny</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seymour, Kevin.G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shawcross, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yates, Julian M.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Dental materials</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Osman, Muataz A.</au><au>Alamoush, Rasha A.</au><au>Kushnerev, Evgeny</au><au>Seymour, Kevin.G.</au><au>Shawcross, Susan</au><au>Yates, Julian M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Human osteoblasts response to different dental implant abutment materials: An in-vitro study</atitle><jtitle>Dental materials</jtitle><date>2022-09</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1547</spage><epage>1557</epage><pages>1547-1557</pages><issn>0109-5641</issn><issn>1879-0097</issn><eissn>1879-0097</eissn><abstract>This study aimed to investigate human osteoblasts (HOB) response towards different dental implant abutment materials.
Five dental implant abutment materials were investigated: (1) titanium (Ti), (2) titanium coated nitride (TiN), (3) cobalt chromium (CoCr), (4) zirconia (ZrO₂), and (5) modified polyether ether ketone (m-PEEK). HOBs were cultured, expanded, and seeded according to the supplier’s protocol (PromoCell, UK). Cell proliferation and cytotoxicity were evaluated at days 1, 3, 5, and 10 using Alamar Blue (alamarBlue) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) colorimetric assays. Data were analysed via two-way ANOVA, one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test (significance was determined as p < 0.05 for all tests).
All the investigated materials showed high and comparable initial proliferation activities apart from ZrO₂ (46.92%), with P% of 79.91%, 68.77%, 73.20%, and 65.46% for Ti, TiN, CoCr, and m-PEEK, respectively. At day 10, all materials exhibited comparable and lower P% than day 1 apart from TiN (70.90%) with P% of 30.22%, 40.64%, 37.27%, and 50.65% for Ti, CoCr, ZrO₂, and m-PEEK, respectively. The cytotoxic effect of the investigated materials was generally low throughout the whole experiment. At day 10, the cytotoxicity % was 7.63%, 0.21%, 13.30%, 5.32%, 8.60% for Ti, TiN, CoCr, ZrO₂, and m-PEEK. The Two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s Multiple Comparison Method highlighted significant material and time effects on cell proliferation and cytotoxicity, and a significant interaction (p < 0.0001) between the tested materials. Notably, TiN and m-PEEK showed improved HOB proliferation activity and cytotoxic levels than the other investigated materials. In addition, a non-significant negative correlation between viability and cytotoxicity was found for all tested materials. Ti (p = 0.07), TiN (p = 0.28), CoCr (p = 0.15), ZrO₂ (p = 0.17), and m-PEEK (p = 0.12).
All the investigated materials showed excellent biocompatibility properties with more promising results for the newly introduced TiN and m-PEEK as alternatives to the traditionally used dental implant and abutment materials.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><doi>10.1016/j.dental.2022.07.005</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0109-5641 |
| ispartof | Dental materials, 2022-09, Vol.38 (9), p.1547-1557 |
| issn | 0109-5641 1879-0097 1879-0097 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2697095976 |
| source | Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
| subjects | Cell proliferation Cobalt chromium Cytotoxicity Dental implant materials Human osteoblasts Modified polyether ether ketone Polyether ether ketone Titanium Titanium nitride Zirconia |
| title | Human osteoblasts response to different dental implant abutment materials: An in-vitro study |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T10%3A06%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Human%20osteoblasts%20response%20to%20different%20dental%20implant%20abutment%20materials:%20An%20in-vitro%20study&rft.jtitle=Dental%20materials&rft.au=Osman,%20Muataz%20A.&rft.date=2022-09&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1547&rft.epage=1557&rft.pages=1547-1557&rft.issn=0109-5641&rft.eissn=1879-0097&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.dental.2022.07.005&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2697095976%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2697095976&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0109564122002184&rfr_iscdi=true |