Effects of artificial micro- and nano-structured surfaces on cell behaviour.

Substrate topography, independently of substrate chemistry, has been reported to have significant effects on cell behaviour. Based on the use of fabrication techniques developed by the silicon microtechnology industry, numerous studies can now be found in the literature analyzing cell behaviour as to various micro- and nano-features such as lines, wells, holes and more. Most of these works have been found to relate the micro- and nano-sized topographical features with cell orientation, migration, morphology and proliferation. In recent papers, even the influence of substrate nanotopography on cell gene expression and differentiation has been pointed out. However, despite the large number of papers published on this topic, significant general trends in cell behaviour are difficult to establish due to differences in cell type, substrate material, feature aspect-ratio, feature geometry and parameters measured. This paper intends to compile and review the relevant existing information on the behaviour of cells on micro- and nano-structured artificial substrates and analyze possible general behavioural trends.

[1]  Josep Samitier,et al.  Production of structures for microfluidics using polymer imprint techniques , 2005 .

[2]  M. Riehle,et al.  Interaction of animal cells with ordered nanotopography. , 2002, IEEE transactions on nanobioscience.

[3]  S. Mallapragada,et al.  Oriented Schwann cell growth on micropatterned biodegradable polymer substrates. , 2001, Biomaterials.

[4]  R. Langford,et al.  Application of a focused ion beam system to micro and nanoengineering , 2002 .

[5]  C. Oakley,et al.  The sequence of alignment of microtubules, focal contacts and actin filaments in fibroblasts spreading on smooth and grooved titanium substrata. , 1993, Journal of cell science.

[6]  A Curtis,et al.  Activation of macrophage‐like cells by multiple grooved substrata. Topographical control of cell behaviour. , 1995, Cell biology international.

[7]  S. Mallapragada,et al.  Oriented astroglial cell growth on micropatterned polystyrene substrates. , 2004, Biomaterials.

[8]  C. Wilkinson,et al.  Topographical control of cell behaviour. I. Simple step cues. , 1987, Development.

[9]  Thomas J Webster,et al.  Polymers with nano-dimensional surface features enhance bladder smooth muscle cell adhesion. , 2003, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[10]  C J Murphy,et al.  Effects of synthetic micro- and nano-structured surfaces on cell behavior. , 1999, Biomaterials.

[11]  T. Desai,et al.  Osteogenic differentiation of marrow stromal cells cultured on nanoporous alumina surfaces. , 2007, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[12]  A F von Recum,et al.  Surface Micromorphology and Cellular Interactions , 1993, Journal of biomaterials applications.

[13]  A. Curtis,et al.  CONTROL OF CELL BEHAVIOR: TOPOLOGICAL FACTORS. , 1964, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[14]  V. Hasırcı,et al.  Novel surface patterning approaches for tissue engineering and their effect on cell behavior. , 2006, Nanomedicine.

[15]  F. Watt,et al.  Cell shape controls terminal differentiation of human epidermal keratinocytes. , 1988, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  C. Wilkinson,et al.  Substratum nanotopography and the adhesion of biological cells. Are symmetry or regularity of nanotopography important? , 2001, Biophysical chemistry.

[17]  A S G Curtis,et al.  In vitro reaction of endothelial cells to polymer demixed nanotopography. , 2002, Biomaterials.

[18]  C. Wilkinson,et al.  Topographical control of cell behaviour: II. Multiple grooved substrata. , 1990, Development.

[19]  C. Wilkinson,et al.  Cells react to nanoscale order and symmetry in their surroundings , 2004, IEEE Transactions on NanoBioscience.

[20]  J. Jansen,et al.  The threshold at which substrate nanogroove dimensions may influence fibroblast alignment and adhesion. , 2007, Biomaterials.

[21]  E. Wintermantel,et al.  Grooves affect primary bone marrow but not osteoblastic MC3T3-E1 cell cultures. , 2001, Biomaterials.

[22]  C. Murphy,et al.  Responses of human keratocytes to micro- and nanostructured substrates. , 2004, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[23]  C. Murphy,et al.  Epithelial contact guidance on well-defined micro- and nanostructured substrates , 2003, Journal of Cell Science.

[24]  Matthew J Dalby,et al.  Nucleus alignment and cell signaling in fibroblasts: response to a micro-grooved topography. , 2003, Experimental cell research.

[25]  William P King,et al.  Hot embossing for micropatterned cell substrates. , 2004, Biomaterials.

[26]  Y Chen,et al.  Nanofabrication: Conventional and nonconventional methods , 2001, Electrophoresis.

[27]  A F von Recum,et al.  Fibroblast response to microtextured silicone surfaces: texture orientation into or out of the surface. , 1994, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[28]  Matthew John Dalby,et al.  Changes in fibroblast morphology in response to nano-columns produced by colloidal lithography. , 2004, Biomaterials.

[29]  Stephen Y. Chou,et al.  Imprint of sub-25 nm vias and trenches in polymers , 1995 .

[30]  R G Harrison,et al.  ON THE STEREOTROPISM OF EMBRYONIC CELLS. , 1911, Science.

[31]  Mathis O. Riehle,et al.  The use of materials patterned on a nano- and micro-metric scale in cellular engineering , 2002 .

[32]  Thomas J Webster,et al.  Enhanced functions of osteoblasts on nanometer diameter carbon fibers. , 2002, Biomaterials.

[33]  R. Oreffo,et al.  Osteoprogenitor response to semi-ordered and random nanotopographies. , 2006, Biomaterials.

[34]  Benjamin Geiger,et al.  Cell spreading and focal adhesion dynamics are regulated by spacing of integrin ligands. , 2007, Biophysical journal.

[35]  Submicron-scale topographical control of cell growth using holographic surface relief grating , 2004 .

[36]  Thomas J Webster,et al.  Endothelial and vascular smooth muscle cell function on poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) with nano-structured surface features. , 2004, Biomaterials.

[37]  Nikolaj Gadegaard,et al.  Cell signaling arising from nanotopography: implications for nanomedical devices. , 2006, Nanomedicine.

[38]  M. Madou.  Fundamentals of microfabrication , 1997 .

[39]  C. S. Chen,et al.  Geometric control of cell life and death. , 1997, Science.

[40]  C. Wilkinson,et al.  The control of human mesenchymal cell differentiation using nanoscale symmetry and disorder. , 2007, Nature materials.

[41]  B. Boyan,et al.  Integrin alpha(5) controls osteoblastic proliferation and differentiation responses to titanium substrates presenting different roughness characteristics in a roughness independent manner. , 2007, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[42]  Gordana Vunjak-Novakovic,et al.  The effect of actin disrupting agents on contact guidance of human embryonic stem cells. , 2007, Biomaterials.

[43]  Janos Vörös,et al.  Systematic study of osteoblast response to nanotopography by means of nanoparticle-density gradients. , 2007, Biomaterials.

[44]  Christopher S. Chen,et al.  Cell shape, cytoskeletal tension, and RhoA regulate stem cell lineage commitment. , 2004, Developmental cell.

[45]  A. Wood,et al.  Contact guidance on microfabricated substrata: the response of teleost fin mesenchyme cells to repeating topographical patterns. , 1988, Journal of cell science.

[46]  Ijaz Ahmed,et al.  A synthetic nanofibrillar matrix promotes in vivo-like organization and morphogenesis for cells in culture. , 2005, Biomaterials.

[47]  F. Bäckhed,et al.  Nanoscale features influence epithelial cell morphology and cytokine production. , 2003, Biomaterials.

[48]  Matthew J Dalby,et al.  Fibroblast response to a controlled nanoenvironment produced by colloidal lithography. , 2004, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[49]  A Curtis,et al.  Guidance and activation of murine macrophages by nanometric scale topography. , 1996, Experimental cell research.

[50]  Christopher J Murphy,et al.  The effect of environmental factors on the response of human corneal epithelial cells to nanoscale substrate topography. , 2006, Biomaterials.

[51]  C. G. Willson,et al.  Introduction to microlithography , 1994 .

[52]  M. Yoshinari,et al.  The attachment and growth behavior of osteoblast-like cells on microtextured surfaces. , 2003, Biomaterials.

[53]  W. Nisch,et al.  Variation in contact guidance by human cells on a microstructured surface. , 1995, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[54]  John A. Hunt,et al.  Laser surface modification of polymers to improve biocompatibility , 1995 .

[55]  J. Jansen,et al.  The effect of poly-L-lactic acid with parallel surface micro groove on osteoblast-like cells in vitro. , 1999, Biomaterials.

[56]  Nikolaj Gadegaard,et al.  Investigating filopodia sensing using arrays of defined nano-pits down to 35 nm diameter in size. , 2004, The international journal of biochemistry & cell biology.