Abstract
Abstract Most dental implants used in dental practices are made of titanium or titanium alloys so that the essential differences promoted by the various manufacturers are at the level of their surface; through specific surface treatments, the aim is to obtain improved results regarding osseointegration. This study attempts to identify the differences between a series of used brands of dental implants by analyzing the chemical composition and the morphology of their surface and is particularly significant for the potential users as it highlights the manner of performances of the aforementioned implants, providing them with a tool in choosing the proper dental implant to suit their needs. It was found that, as the technology evolved and the costs were reduced, there is a net preference for using pure titanium or its alloys in the manufacture of dental implants versus the stainless steel titanium alloys, considered now a thing of the past.
Highlights
A significant number of researchers sought to identify over the time a number of biocompatible materials which can be used to replace and/or restore the missing or injured anatomical structures
The morphological characterization of samples was carried out using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) with an FEI Inspect S50 apparatus (FEI, Hillsboro, OR, USA), used with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) system produced by EDAX (Mahwah, NJ 07430, USA), with fixed silicon detector and Peltier element integrated as a cooling system
Following the investigations made on the 11 dental implant samples from different providers, it emerges as a general conclusion the preference for the use of pure titanium or its alloys in the manufacture of dental implants
Summary
A significant number of researchers sought to identify over the time a number of biocompatible materials which can be used to replace and/or restore the missing or injured anatomical structures. Biotolerant materials (Co–Cr alloys, stainless steel, tantalum, or some polyols), bioinert materials (titanium and its alloys, zirconia), or even bioactive materials (hydroxyapatite) have been identified, but the constraints due to the small size of devices and the increased mechanical stress they are subjected to led over the time to a preference for bioinert materials such as titanium and its alloys, which have proven to represent an optimal solution for dental implants Their enhanced biocompatibility and other desired properties and qualities made the manufacturers to choose titanium and its alloys as raw materials for dental implants over the stainless steel titanium alloys [2–15].
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
