Abstract
The chemical composition and the surface characteristics of dental implants are factors that have a decisive effect on the osseointegration process. The surface characterization at the compositional and topographic level of three dental implants available in the market was performed with different surface treatments: (1) sandblasted and acid etched surface (SLA), (2) hydroxyapatite (HA) and tricalcium phosphate (TCP) blasted surface (HA/TCP), and (3) HA-blasted and non-etching acid washed surface (HA + AW). In addition, an in vitro viability study of MG-63 osteoblast cells was performed with a JC-1 test. To complete the study, an in vivo study was conducted in New Zealand rabbits. The study analyzed the histometric characteristics of the bone formed around the implants at the level of area, volume, bone density, accumulated bone density, and bone–implant contact (BIC). The rabbits were sacrificed at 6 weeks after implants were placed in the tibial metaphysis. No statistically significant differences were observed at the level of cell viability or histometric parameters between the different study groups (p > 0.05). SLA and HA/TCP surfaces were the ones that obtained a higher BIC value. Taking into account the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that the different implant surfaces analyzed favor a good bone response.
Highlights
Since titanium began to be used as a dental implant material in the 1960s, the goal has been to improve the design and surface of the different implants available on the market, as well as to develop new implants that improve osseointegration behavior, aimed at shortening healing times or, for example, improving primary stability in the face of low-density bone.Grade IV or alloy titanium implants are used currently, with the Ti6Al4V alloy being the most widely used one [1]
When machined surfaces have been compared with implants with surface treatment, it has been observed that the latter improve osseointegration by increasing bone–implant contact and long-term survival rate
Discussion surface is based on sandblasting with synthetic resorbable bioceramic particles, such as titanium dioxide, This study evaluated the influence of the surface of three dental implants on the in vitro cellular hydroxyapatite, or tricalcium phosphate particles, to make the surface rougher [24,25]
Summary
Grade IV (commercially pure) or alloy titanium implants are used currently, with the Ti6Al4V alloy being the most widely used one [1]. Titanium alloys have better mechanical properties than pure titanium [5]. When machined surfaces have been compared with implants with surface treatment, it has been observed that the latter improve osseointegration by increasing bone–implant contact and long-term survival rate. This is partly due to the chemical composition of the implant and to its topographical characteristics [6]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
