Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T10:54:26.888Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Influence of Surface Microgeometry on Fibroblast Colonization of Synthetic Surfaces

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

J. L. Ricci ,
H. Alexander  and
C. Howard
J. L. Ricci
Affiliation:
Department of Bioengineering, Hospital for Joint Diseases Orthopaedic Institute, 301 East 17th Street, New York, NY 10003
H. Alexander
Affiliation:
Department of Bioengineering, Hospital for Joint Diseases Orthopaedic Institute, 301 East 17th Street, New York, NY 10003
C. Howard
Affiliation:
Department of Bioengineering, Hospital for Joint Diseases Orthopaedic Institute, 301 East 17th Street, New York, NY 10003
Get access

Extract

Tissue response to any synthetic implant—whether vascular device, dental implant, orthopaedic device, or any other implant that is in contact with soft connective tissue or mineralized tissue—has been found to correlate with the composition, surface chemistry, and surface microgeometry of the implant material.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 252: Symposium T – Tissue-Inducing Biomaterials , 1991 , 221
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Albrektsson, T, Hansson, H-A, Ivarsson, B: Interface analysis of titanium and zirconium bone implants. Biomaterials 6:97–101, 1985.Google Scholar
2. Albrektsson, T, Hansson, H-A: An ultrastructural characterization of the interface between bone and sputtered titanium or stainless steel. Biomaterials 7:201–205, 1986.Google Scholar
3. Haddad, R J Jr, Cook, S D, Thomas, K A: Biological fixation of porous-coated implants. J Bone Joint Surg 69A:1459–1466, 1987.Google Scholar
4. Linder, L, Carlsson, A, Marsal, L, Bjurstein, L M, Brlnemark, P-I: Clinical aspects of osteointegration in joint replacement: a histologic study of titanium implants. J Bone Joint Surg 70B:550–555, 1988.Google Scholar
5. Thomas, K A, Cook, S D: An evaluation of variables influencing implant fixation by direct bone apposition. J Biomed Mater Res 19:875–901, 1985.Google Scholar
6. Thomas, K A, Kay, J F, Cook, S D, Jarcho, M: The effect of surface macrotexture and hydroxylapatite coating on the mechanical strengths and histologic profiles of titanium implant materials. J Biomed Mater Res 21:1395–1414, 1987.Google Scholar
7. von Recum, A F: Applications and failure modes of percutaneous devices: a review. J Biomed Mater Res 18:323:336, 1984 Google Scholar
8. Chehroudi, B, Gould, T R L, Brunette, D M: Effects of a grooved titanium-coated implant surface on epithelial cell behaviour in vitro and in vivo. J Biomed Mater Res 24:1067–1085, 1990.Google Scholar
9. Inoue, T, Cox, J E, Pilliar, R M, Melcher, A H: Effect of the surface geometry of smooth and porous-coated titanium alloy on the orientation of fibroblasts in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res 21:107–126, 1987.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10. Gross, U M, Miiller-Mai, C, Voigt, C, Fritz, T, Huber-Betzer, H, Mattheck, C: Biomechanically optimized surface profiles by coupled bone development and resorption at hyuroxyapatite surfaces. Trans Soc Biomater 13:83, 1990.Google Scholar
11. McAuslan, B R, Johnson, C: Cell responses to biomaterials I: adhesion and growth of vascular endothelial cells on poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) following surface modification by hydrolytic etching. J Biomed Mater Res 21:921–935, 1987.Google Scholar
12. Chehroudi, B, Gould, T R L, Brunette, D M: Effects of a grooved epoxy substratum on epithelial cell behaviour in vitro and in vivo. J Biomed Mater Res 22:459–473, 1988.Google Scholar
13. Ricci, J L, Gona, A G, Alexander, H, Parsons, J R: Morphological characteristics of tendon cells cultured on synthetic fibers. J Biomed Mater Res 18:1073–1087, 1984.Google Scholar
14. Abercrombie, M: The crawling movement of metazoan cells (Croonian Lecture delivered to the Royal Society 11 May 1978). Proc Roy Soc, 207B:129–147, 1980.Google Scholar
15. Dunn, G A, Brown, F: Alignment of fibroblasts on grooved surfaces described by a simple geometric transformation. J Cell Sci 83:313–340, 1986.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16. Overton, J: Differential response of embryonic cells to culture on tissue matrices. Tissue Cell 11:89–98, 1979.Google Scholar
17. Shor, S L: Cell proliferation and migration on collagen substrata in vitro, J Cell Sci 41:159–175, 1980.Google Scholar
18. Sarber, R, Hun, B, Merrill, C, Soranno, T, Bell, E: Regulation of proliferation of fibroblasts of low and high population doubling levels grown on collagen lattices. Mech Ageing Dev 17:107–117, 1981.Google Scholar
19. Ricci, J L, Gona, A G, Alexander, H: In vitro tendon cell growth rates on a synthetic fiber scaffold material and on standard culture plates. J Biomed Mater Res, 25(5):651–666,1991.Google Scholar
20. Ricci, J and Alexander, H: In vitro tendon cell growth on synthetic fiber implant materials: biological implications. Bull Hosp Joint Dis Orthop Inst 50(2):126–138, 1990.Google ScholarPubMed
21. Chesmel, K, Clark, C C, Black, J: Culture surface morphology and chemistry have a synergistic effect on bone cell protein synthesis. Proc. Soc Biomater 12:1, 1989.Google Scholar