Export file:


  • RIS(for EndNote,Reference Manager,ProCite)
  • BibTex
  • Text


  • Citation Only
  • Citation and Abstract

Effect of nanometer scale surface roughness of titanium for osteoblast function

Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Yamagata University, 4-3-16 Jonan, Yonezawa, Yamagata 992-8510, Japan

Topical Section: Cell and Tissue Engineering

Surface roughness is an important property for metallic materials used in medical implants or other devices. The present study investigated the effects of surface roughness on cellular function, namely cell attachment, proliferation, and differentiation potential. Titanium (Ti) discs, with a hundred nanometer- or nanometer-scale surface roughness (rough and smooth Ti surface, respectively) were prepared by polishing with silicon carbide paper. MC3T3-E1 mouse osteoblast-like cells were cultured on the discs, and their attachment, spreading area, proliferation, and calcification were analyzed. Cells cultured on rough Ti discs showed reduced attachment, proliferation, and calcification ability suggesting that the surface inhibited osteoblast function. The findings can provide a basis for improving the biocompatibility of medical devices.
  Article Metrics

Keywords titanium; roughness; osteoblast; cell attachment; biomaterial

Citation: Satoshi Migita, Kunitaka Araki. Effect of nanometer scale surface roughness of titanium for osteoblast function. AIMS Bioengineering, 2017, 4(1): 162-170. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2017.1.162


  • 1. Williams DF (2009) On the nature of biomaterials.Biomaterials 30: 5897–5909.    
  • 2. Hanawa T (2012) Research and development of metals for medical devices based on clinical needs. Sci Technol Adv Mater 13: 64102–64116.    
  • 3. Kirmanidou Y, Sidira M, Drosou ME, et al. (2016) New Ti-alloys and surface modifications to improve the mechanical properties and the biological response to orthopedic and dental implants: a review. Biomed Res Int 2016: 2908570–2908590.
  • 4. Mahapatro A (2015) Bio-functional nano-coatings on metallic biomaterials. Mater Sci Eng C 55: 227–251.    
  • 5. Duraccio D, Mussano F, Faga MG (2015) Biomaterials for dental implants: current and future trends.J Mater Sci 50: 4779–4812.    
  • 6. Chang PC, Lang NP, Giannobile WV (2010) Evaluation of functional dynamics during osseointegration and regeneration associated with oral implants. Clin Oral Implan Res 21: 1–12.    
  • 7. Gittens RA, Olivares-Navarrete R, Schwartz Z, et al. (2014) Implant osseointegration and the role of microroughness and nanostructures: lessons for spine implants. Acta Biomater 10: 3363–3371.    
  • 8. Zhao G, Raines AL, Wieland M, et al. (2007) Requirement for both micron- and submicron scale structure for synergistic response of osteoblasts to substrate surface energy and topography. Biomaterials 28: 2821–2829.    
  • 9. Zhang RF, Qiao LP, Qu B, et al. (2015) Biocompatibility of micro-arc oxidation coatings developed on Ti6Al4V alloy in a solution containing organic phosphate. Mater Lett 153: 77–80.    
  • 10. Santiago-Medina P, Sundaram PA, Diffoot-Carlo N (2014) The effects of micro arc oxidation of gamma titanium aluminide surfaces on osteoblast adhesion and differentiation. J Mater Sci Mater Med 25: 1577–1587.    
  • 11. Wang L, Shi L, Chen J, et al. (2014) Biocompatibility of Si-incorporated TiO2 film prepared by micro-arc oxidation. Mater Lett 116: 35–38.    
  • 12. Yao CK, Lin KC, Tarng YW, et al. (2014) Removal of forearm plate leads to a high risk of refracture: decision regarding implant removal after fixation of the forearm and analysis of risk factors of refracture. Arch Orthop Traum Surg 134: 1691–1697.    
  • 13. Kovar FM, Strasser E, Jaindl M, et al. (2015) Complications following implant removal in patients with proximal femur fractures-an observational study over 16 years.Orthop Traum Surg Res 101: 785–789.    
  • 14. Takada R, Jinno T, Tsutsumi Y, et al. (2017) Inhibitory effect of zirconium coating to bone bonding of titanium implants in rat femur. Mater Trans 58: 113–117.    
  • 15. Sammons RL, Lumbikanonda N, Gross M, et al. (2005)Comparison of osteoblast spreading on microstructured dental implant surfaces and cell behaviour in an explant model of osseointegration. Clin Oral Implan Res 16: 657–666.
  • 16. Gittens RA, McLachlan T, Olivares-Navarrete R, et al. (2011) The effects of combined micron-/submicron-scale surface roughness and nanoscale features on cell proliferation and differentiation.Biomaterials 32: 3395–3403.    
  • 17. Rupp F, Scheideler L, Olshanska N, et al. (2006) Enhancing surface free energy and hydrophilicity through chemical modification of microstructured titanium implant surfaces. J Biomed Mater Res A 76: 323–334.
  • 18. Cai K, Bossert J, Jandt KD (2006) Does the nanometre scale topography of titanium influence protein adsorption and cell proliferation? Colloid Surface B 49: 136–144.    
  • 19. Migita S, Okuyama S, Araki K (2016) Sub-micrometer scale surface roughness of titanium reduces fibroblasts function. J Appl Biomat Funct Mater 14: e65–e69.
  • 20. Chen CS, Mrksich M, Huang S, et al. (1997) Geometric control of cell life and death. Science 276: 1425–1428.
  • 21. Chen CS, Mrksich M, Huang S, et al. (1998) Micropatterned surfaces for control of cell shape, position, and function. Biotechnol Progr 14: 356–363.    
  • 22. Chen CS, Alonso JL, Ostuni E, et al. (2003) Cell shape provides global control of focal adhesion assembly.Biochem Bioph Res Co 307: 355–361.    
  • 23. Gregory CA, Gunn WG, Peister A, et al. (2004) An alizarin red-based assay of mineralization by adherent cells in culture: comparison with cetylpyridinium chloride extraction. Anal Biochem 329: 77–84.    
  • 24. Damsky CH (1999) Extracellular matrix-integrin interactions in osteoblast function and tissue remodeling.Bone 25: 95–96.    
  • 25. Anselme K (2000) Osteoblast adhesion on biomaterials. Biomaterials 21: 667–681.    
  • 26. Boudreau NJ, Jones PL (1999)Extracellular matrix and integrin signaling: the shape of things to come. Biochem J 339: 481–488.
  • 27. Geiger B, Spatz JP, Bershadsky AD (2009) Environmental sensing through focal adhesions. Nat Rev Mol Cell Bio 10: 21–33.    
  • 28. Wozniak MA, Modzelewska K, Kwong L, et al. (2004) Focal adhesion regulation of cell behavior. BBA Mol Cell Res 1692: 103–119.


This article has been cited by

  • 1. Sara Metwally, Urszula Stachewicz, Surface potential and charges impact on cell responses on biomaterials interfaces for medical applications, Materials Science and Engineering: C, 2019, 109883, 10.1016/j.msec.2019.109883

Reader Comments

your name: *   your email: *  

Copyright Info: 2017, Satoshi Migita, et al., licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licese (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Download full text in PDF

Export Citation

Copyright © AIMS Press All Rights Reserved