Publications

Unlike the attachment of soft epithelial skin tissue to penetrating solid natural structures like fingernails and teeth, sealing around percutaneous/permucosal devices such as dental implants is hindered by inflammation and epidermal down growth. Here, we employed a dual keratinocyte-adhesive peptide and anti-inflammatory biomolecule coating on titanium to promote oral epithelial tissue attachment. For minimizing inflammation-triggered epidermal down growth, we coated pristine and oxygen plasma pre-treated polished titanium (pTi) with conjugated linoleic acid (CLA). Further, in order to aid in soft tissue attachment via the formation of hemidesmosomes, adhesive structures by oral keratinocytes, we coated the anionic linoleic acid (LA) adsorbed titanium with cationic cell adhesive peptides (CAP), LamLG3, a peptide derived from Laminin 332, the major extracellular matrix component of the basement membrane in skin tissue and Net1, derived from Netrin-1, a neural chemoattractant capable of epithelial cell attachment via alpha 6 beta 4 integrins. The dual CLA-CAP coatings on pTi were characterized by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy and dynamic water contact angle measurements. The proliferation of human oral keratinocytes (TERT-2/OKF6) was accelerated on the peptide coated titanium while also promoting the expression of Col XVII and beta-4 integrin, two markers for hemidesmosomes. Simultaneously, CLA coating suppressed the production of inducible nitric oxide synthase (anti-iNOS); a pro-inflammatory M1 marker expressed in lipopolysaccharide (LPS) stimulated murine macrophages (RAW 264.7) and elevated expression of anti-CD206, associated to an anti-inflammatory M2 macrophage phenotype. Taken together, the dual keratinocyte-adhesive peptide and anti-inflammatory biomolecule coating on titanium can help reduce inflammation and promote permucosal/peri-implant soft tissue sealing.

JTD Keywords: Adhesives, Animal, Animals, Anti-inflammatories, Anti-inflammatory agents, Antiinflammatory agent, Biomolecules, Bone, Cell adhesion, Cell-adhesives, Coatings, Conjugated linoleic acid, Conjugated linoleic-acid, Contact angle, Hemidesmosome, Hemidesmosomes, Human, Humans, Hydroxyapatite, Inflammation, Integrins, Keratinocyte, Keratinocytes, Linoleic acid, Macrophages, Mice, Mouse, Nitric oxide, Oral implants, Pathology, Peptides, Skin tissue, Soft tissue, Supplementation, Surface properties, Surface property, Tissue, Titania, Titanium, X ray photoelectron spectroscopy

With the currently available materials and technologies it is difficult to mimic the mechanical properties of soft living tissues. Additionally, another significant problem is the lack of information about the mechanical properties of these tissues. Alternatively, the use of phantoms offers a promising solution to simulate biological bodies. For this reason, to advance in the state-of-the-art a wide range of organs (e.g., liver, heart, kidney as well as brain) and hydrogels (e.g., agarose, polyvinyl alcohol –PVA–, Phytagel –PHY– and methacrylate gelatine –GelMA–) were tested regarding their mechanical properties. For that, viscoelastic behavior, hardness, as well as a non-linear elastic mechanical response were measured. It was seen that there was a significant difference among the results for the different mentioned soft tissues. Some of them appear to be more elastic than viscous as well as being softer or harder. With all this information in mind, a correlation between the mechanical properties of the organs and the different materials was performed. The next conclusions were drawn: (1) to mimic the liver, the best material is 1% wt agarose; (2) to mimic the heart, the best material is 2% wt agarose; (3) to mimic the kidney, the best material is 4% wt GelMA; and (4) to mimic the brain, the best materials are 4% wt GelMA and 1% wt agarose. Neither PVA nor PHY was selected to mimic any of the studied tissues. © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

JTD Keywords: brain, composite hydrogel, dynamic mechanical analysis, elastography, hardness, hydrogels, in-vitro, liver, materials, mechanical-properties, mimicking, soft tissues, tissue scaffolding, viscoelasticity, warner-braztler shear test, warner–braztler shear test, Dynamic mechanical analysis, Hardness, Hydrogels, Materials, Mimicking, Soft tissues, Tissue scaffolding, Viscoelastic characterization, Viscoelasticity, Warner–braztler shear test