# Impact of Zirconia and Titanium Implant Surfaces of Different Roughness on Oral Epithelial Cells

## TL;DR

This study examines how the roughness of dental implant surfaces affects oral epithelial cells, finding that roughness influences cell behavior more than the material used.

## Contribution

The study reveals that surface roughness, rather than material type, moderately affects oral epithelial cell behavior, including immunological and barrier functions.

## Key findings

- Rougher surfaces promote cell proliferation in the initial culture phase.
- Rough surfaces enhance the expression of genes related to cell adhesion and immune response.
- Surface material (titanium vs. zirconia) does not significantly affect the studied cell parameters.

## Abstract

Background/Objectives: Formation of tight contacts between oral soft tissue and dental implants is a significant challenge in contemporary implantology. An essential role in this process is played by oral epithelial cells. In the present study, we investigated how titanium and zirconia surfaces with different roughness influence various parameters of oral epithelial cells in vitro. Methods: We used the human oral squamous carcinoma Ca9-22 cell line and cultured them on the following surfaces: machined smooth titanium (TiM) and zirconia (ZrM) surfaces, as well as sandblasted and acid-etched titanium moderately rough (SLA) and zirconia (ZLA) surfaces. Cell proliferation/viability was measured by CCK-8 assay, and cell morphology was analyzed by fluorescent microscopy. The gene expression of interleukin (IL)-8, intercellular adhesion molecule (ICAM)-1, E-cadherin, integrin (ITG)-α6, and ITG-β4 was measured by qPCR, and the content of IL-8 in conditioned media by ELISA. Results: At the initial culture phase, cell proliferation was promoted by rougher surfaces. Differences in cell attachment were observed between machined and moderately rough surfaces. Machined surfaces were associated with slightly higher IL-8 levels (p < 0.05). Furthermore, both ZLA and SLA surfaces promoted the expression of (ITG)-α, ITG-β4, and ICAM-1 in Ca9-22 cells (p < 0.05). Surface material had no impact on the investigated parameters. Conclusions: Under the limitations of this in vitro study, some properties of oral epithelial cells, particularly the immunological and barrier function, are moderately modified by roughness but not by material. Hence, the roughness of the implant surface might play a role in the quality of the peri-implant epithelium.