Abstract
The success of titanium dental implants depends on their osseointegration into the bone, which is determined by the composition and surface properties of the implant in close contact with the bone. There is a wide variety of implants on the market. Is it possible to identify the implant with the best composition and surface topography for optimal osseointegration? To this aim, 13 brands of dental implants from nine distinct manufacturers have been selected and their composition and surface topography determined. The obtained results show differences between these implants, in this case, the Ssk averages of the three measurements performed on each implant were positive, or 0.4 (0.1–0.8), indicating that the roughness of all implants analyzed was primarily textured and not flat. Like Sa, we found the highest Sdr for implants subjected only to sandblasting. In addition, only the ALS-active® implant had a modified microstructure on its surface. However, analysis of the NANOTITE implant surface revealed a 1.40% presence of calcium which we consider too low to have an effect on bone formation around the implant. As a result, we have also highlighted the lack of a recognized independent standard for dental implant surface conditions and the lack of independent quality control vis-à-vis manufacturers. Of all the surface types studied, none proved more satisfactory than another.
Highlights
Academic Editor: Bruno ChrcanovicPer-Ingvar Brånemark [1], proved the long-term success of titanium implants and laid the foundations of modern implantology
The processes used on the surfaces of all the studied implants can be categorized as the same type: subtractive
We noted that the Sa and Sq values varied significantly depending on the implant surface being analyzed
Summary
Per-Ingvar Brånemark [1], proved the long-term success of titanium implants and laid the foundations of modern implantology. Titanium-based implant systems, though considered as the gold standard for rehabilitation of edentulous spaces, have been criticized for many inherent flaws. Bone healing around dental implants follows the pattern and sequence of intramembranous osteogenesis with the formation of woven bone first of all followed later by the formation of parallel-fibered and lamellar bone. Bone apposition onto the implant surface starts earlier in trabecular bone than in compact bone. While the first new bone may be found on the implant surface around one week after installation, bone remodeling starts at between 6 and 12 weeks and continues throughout life. Bone remodeling involves the bone–implant interface, transiently exposing portions of the implant surface [2]
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.
