Characterisation of breast implant surfaces and correlation with fibroblast adhesion.

INTRODUCTION Capsular contracture formation is a common complication following breast augmentation surgery. Breast implant shells have either a smooth or a textured surface. Smooth surfaces demonstrate a higher incidence of contracture formation. The 3-dimensional surface of textured implants is thought to disrupt contractile forces and reduce capsular contracture rates. AIM To investigate the interaction of fibroblasts with silicone breast implant surfaces through characterization of their unique features. METHOD Surfaces of smooth and textured breast implants were characterized using a confocal laser scanning microscope, a microtest 5 kN tensile testing device, and a contact angle goniometer. The kinetics of fibroblast interaction with these surfaces was further analysed. RESULTS The textured surfaces were rough, and nodular containing high peaks and deep crevasses with roughness (Sa) values in the range 8.88-18.83 μm and contact angles between 130° and 142°. The smooth implant surfaces were less rough, more regular and repetitive with 0.06-0.07 μm surface roughness, and contact angles between 110.9° and 111.8°. The textured surfaces displayed higher bending stiffness than the smooth surfaces (0.19 and 0.26 N mm). Significant (p<0.05) numbers of fibroblasts were attached to the textured surfaces compared to the smooth surfaces which had higher levels of cell adhesion with surface roughness above 8 μm and contact angles above 130°. CONCLUSIONS In summary, surfaces with arithmetical mean deviation of greater roughness and reduced hydrophilicity with high water contact angles enhanced cell adhesion. These features aid design of improved surfaces, which may help, in prevention of breast capsular formation.

[1]  H. Grüll,et al.  Wetting behavior of water droplets on hydrophobic microtextures of comparable size. , 2004, Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids.

[2]  Y. Ikada,et al.  Cell adhesion to plasma-treated polymer surfaces , 1993 .

[3]  C. Fotakis,et al.  Tuning cell adhesion by controlling the roughness and wettability of 3D micro/nano silicon structures. , 2010, Acta biomaterialia.

[4]  M. Silverstein,et al.  The Fate of Breast Implants: A CriticalAnalysis of Complications and Outcomes , 1995, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[5]  A. Abramo,et al.  How Texture-Inducing Contraction Vectors Affect the Fibrous Capsule Shrinkage Around Breasts Implants? , 2010, Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.

[6]  V. Weaver,et al.  Effect of substrate stiffness and PDGF on the behavior of vascular smooth muscle cells: Implications for atherosclerosis , 2010, Journal of cellular physiology.

[7]  Heather Sheardown,et al.  Controlling cellular activity by manipulating silicone surface roughness. , 2010, Colloids and surfaces. B, Biointerfaces.

[8]  Alireza Dolatshahi-Pirouz,et al.  A combinatorial screening of human fibroblast responses on micro-structured surfaces. , 2010, Biomaterials.

[9]  M. Revol,et al.  [A scanning electron microscopy study of the surface of porous-textured breast implants and their capsules. Description of the "velcro" effect of porous-textured breast prostheses]. , 2001, Annales de chirurgie plastique et esthetique.

[10]  W. Adams,et al.  Enhancing patient outcomes in aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery using triple antibiotic breast irrigation: six-year prospective clinical study. , 2006, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[11]  Timothy A. Miller,et al.  The Influence of Time on Human Breast Capsule Histology: Smooth and Textured Silicone‐Surfaced Implants , 1998, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[12]  H. Mirzadeh,et al.  Effect of silicon rubber crosslink density on fibroblast cell behavior in vitro. , 2003, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[13]  D. Hollister,et al.  Types of collagen in breast capsules. , 1989 .

[14]  Her-Hsiung Huang,et al.  Effect of surface roughness of ground titanium on initial cell adhesion. , 2004, Biomolecular engineering.

[15]  J. Olsen,et al.  Capsular Contracture After Cosmetic Breast Implant Surgery in Denmark , 2001, Annals of plastic surgery.

[16]  J. Casey.  Pulp and paper : chemistry and chemical technology , 1960 .

[17]  P. Schnur,et al.  Capsular Contracture: A Prospective Study of the Effect of Local Antibacterial Agents , 1986, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[18]  N. Hardt,et al.  The synovial structure of breast-implant-associated bursae. , 1994, Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc.

[19]  A. Bayat,et al.  Patterning of Novel Breast Implant Surfaces by Enhancing Silicone Biocompatibility, Using Biomimetic Topographies , 2010, Eplasty.

[20]  S. Bernard,et al.  Histologic Comparison of Breast Implant Shells with Smooth, Foam, and Pillar Microstructuring in a Rat Model from 1 Day to 6 Months , 1995, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[21]  R. T. ten Thije,et al.  Mastopexy with Mesh Reinforcement: The Mechanical Characteristics of Polyester Mesh in the Female Breast , 2009, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.

[22]  Z. Kam,et al.  Fibroblast polarization is a matrix-rigidity-dependent process controlled by focal adhesion mechanosensing , 2011, Nature Cell Biology.

[23]  Maxence Bigerelle,et al.  Relative influence of surface topography and surface chemistry on cell response to bone implant materials. Part 2: Biological aspects , 2010, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine.

[24]  A. Danino,et al.  Étude au microscope électronique à balayage des surfaces des implants mammaires à texturation poreuse et de leurs capsules. Description de l'effet « velcro å des prothèses à texturation poreuse , 2001 .

[25]  S. Spear,et al.  The Correction of Capsular Contracture by Conversion to “Dual-Plane” Positioning: Technique and Outcomes , 2003, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[26]  F. Grinnell,et al.  The effect of growth factor environment on fibroblast morphological response to substrate stiffness. , 2013, Biomaterials.

[27]  Jisoo Ha,et al.  Thickness measurement of silicon thin film coated on metal mold by analyzing infrared thermal image , 2009 .

[28]  D. Lavine.  Saline inflatable prostheses: 14 years' experience , 2004, Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.

[29]  A F von Recum,et al.  Texturing of polymer surfaces at the cellular level. , 1991, Biomaterials.

[30]  R. Ersek.  Rate and Incidence of Capsular Contracture: A Comparison of Smooth and Textured Silicone Double-Lumen Breast Prostheses , 1991, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[31]  M. Gardel,et al.  Cell–substrate interactions , 2010, Journal of physics. Condensed matter : an Institute of Physics journal.

[32]  L. Hakelius,et al.  Tendency to capsular contracture around smooth and textured gel-filled silicone mammary implants : A 5-year follow-up , 1997 .

[33]  M. Morra,et al.  Correlation between substratum roughness and wettability, cell adhesion, and cell migration. , 1998, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[34]  A. Bayat,et al.  Breast implant surface development: perspectives on development and manufacture. , 2011, Aesthetic surgery journal.

[35]  M. Trombetta,et al.  Textured and Smooth Breast Implants: Is There a Difference in the Chemical Structure of Silicone?: An Analysis With Fourier Transformation Infrared and Attenuated Total Reflectance Spectroscopy , 2009, Annals of plastic surgery.

[36]  David L Kaplan,et al.  The influence of elasticity and surface roughness on myogenic and osteogenic-differentiation of cells on silk-elastin biomaterials. , 2011, Biomaterials.