Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Journal of Health and Allied Sciences NU 2022; 12(02): 208-211
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1736284
Review Article

Current Concepts of Surface Topography of Implants: A Review

Raksha Potdar
1   Department of Periodontics, AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Amitha Ramesh
1   Department of Periodontics, AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Both the rate of osseointegration and its extent depend upon the characteristics of the implant surface.[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Depending on the surface of the implant determination of implant–bone contact area, the rate of bone formation around the implant can be done.[6] Hence, the implant surface plays an important part in multiple ways in the osseointegration process.

Keywords

implants - osseointegration - surface topography


Publication History

Article published online:
10 November 2021

© 2021. Nitte (Deemed to be University). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Cooper LF. Biologic determinants of bone formation for osseointegration: clues for future clinical improvements. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 80 (04) 439-449
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Nanci A, Wuest JD, Peru L. et al. Chemical modification of titanium surfaces for covalent attachment of biological molecules. J Biomed Mater Res 1998; 40 (02) 324-335
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Boyan BD, Schwartz Z, Hambleton JC. Response of bone and cartilage cells to biomaterials in vivo and in vitro. J Oral Implantol 1993; 19 (02) 116-122
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Schwartz Z, Swain LD, Marshall T. et al. Modulation of matrix vesicle enzyme activity and phosphatidylserine content by ceramic implant materials during endosteal bone healing. Calcif Tissue Int 1992; 51 (06) 429-437
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Stanford CM, Johnson GK, Fakhry A, Gratton D, Mellonig JT, Wanger W. Outcomes of a fluoride modified implant one year after loading in the posterior-maxilla when placed with the osteotome surgical technique. Appl Osseointegr Res 2006; 5: 50-55
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Le Guéhennec L, Soueidan A, Layrolle P, Amouriq Y. Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration. Dent Mater 2007; 23 (07) 844-854
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Masuda T, Salvi GE, Offenbacher S, Felton DA, Cooper LF. Cell and matrix reactions at titanium implants in surgically prepared rat tibiae. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997; 12 (04) 472-485
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Meyer U, Joos U, Mythili J. et al. Ultrastructural characterization of the implant/bone interface of immediately loaded dental implants. Biomaterials 2004; 25 (10) 1959-1967
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Berglundh T, Abrahamsson I, Lang NP, Lindhe J. De novo alveolar bone formation adjacent to endosseous implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003; 14 (03) 251-262
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Albrektsson T, Brånemark PI, Hansson HA, Lindström J. Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. Acta Orthop Scand 1981; 52 (02) 155-170
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Becker W, Becker BE, Ricci A. et al. A prospective multicenter clinical trial comparing one- and two-stage titanium screw-shaped fixtures with one-stage plasma-sprayed solid-screw fixtures. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2000; 2 (03) 159-165
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T, Andersson B, Krol JJ. A histomorphometric and removal torque study of screw-shaped titanium implants with three different surface topographies. Clin Oral Implants Res 1995; 6 (01) 24-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Wennerberg A, Hallgren C, Johansson C, Danelli S. A histomorphometric evaluation of screw-shaped implants each prepared with two surface roughnesses. Clin Oral Implants Res 1998; 9 (01) 11-19
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Buser D, Schenk RK, Steinemann S, Fiorellini JP, Fox CH, Stich H. Influence of surface characteristics on bone integration of titanium implants. A histomorphometric study in miniature pigs. J Biomed Mater Res 1991; 25 (07) 889-902
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Gotfredsen K, Wennerberg A, Johansson C, Skovgaard LT, Hjørting-Hansen E. Anchorage of TiO2-blasted, HA-coated, and machined implants: an experimental study with rabbits. J Biomed Mater Res 1995; 29 (10) 1223-1231
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Hansson S, Norton M. The relation between surface roughness and interfacial shear strength for bone-anchored implants. A mathematical model. J Biomech 1999; 32 (08) 829-836
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Testori T, Wiseman L, Woolfe S, Porter SS. A prospective multicenter clinical study of the Osseotite implant: four-year interim report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001; 16 (02) 193-200
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Conner KA, Sabatini R, Mealey BL, Takacs VJ, Mills MP, Cochran DL. Guided bone regeneration around titanium plasma-sprayed, acid-etched, and hydroxyapatite-coated implants in the canine model. J Periodontol 2003; 74 (05) 658-668
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Cochran DL, Schenk RK, Lussi A, Higginbottom FL, Buser D. Bone response to unloaded and loaded titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a histometric study in the canine mandible. J Biomed Mater Res 1998; 40 (01) 1-11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Esposito M, Coulthard P, Thomsen P, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different types of dental implants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005; (01) CD003815
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Brett PM, Harle J, Salih V. et al. Roughness response genes in osteoblasts. Bone 2004; 35 (01) 124-133
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Urban RM, Jacobs JJ, Tomlinson MJ, Gavrilovic J, Black J, Peoc'h M. Dissemination of wear particles to the liver, spleen, and abdominal lymph nodes of patients with hip or knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2000; 82 (04) 457-476
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Browne M, Gregson PJ. Effect of mechanical surface pretreatment on metal ion release. Biomaterials 2000; 21 (04) 385-392
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Aparicio C, Gil FJ, Fonseca C, Barbosa M, Planell JA. Corrosion behaviour of commercially pure titanium shot blasted with different materials and sizes of shot particles for dental implant applications. Biomaterials 2003; 24 (02) 263-273
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Ivanoff CJ, Hallgren C, Widmark G, Sennerby L, Wennerberg A. Histologic evaluation of the bone integration of TiO(2) blasted and turned titanium microimplants in humans. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001; 12 (02) 128-134
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Novaes Jr AB, Souza SL, de Oliveira PT, Souza AM. Histomorphometric analysis of the bone-implant contact obtained with 4 different implant surface treatments placed side by side in the dog mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002; 17 (03) 377-383
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Piattelli M, Scarano A, Paolantonio M, Iezzi G, Petrone G, Piattelli A. Bone response to machined and resorbable blast material titanium implants: an experimental study in rabbits. J Oral Implantol 2002; 28 (01) 2-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Müeller WD, Gross U, Fritz T. et al. Evaluation of the interface between bone and titanium surfaces being blasted by aluminium oxide or bioceramic particles. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003; 14 (03) 349-356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Massaro C, Rotolo P, De Riccardis F. et al. Comparative investigation of the surface properties of commercial titanium dental implants. Part I: chemical composition. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2002; 13 (06) 535-548
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Zinger O, Anselme K, Denzer A. et al. Time-dependent morphology and adhesion of osteoblastic cells on titanium model surfaces featuring scale-resolved topography. Biomaterials 2004; 25 (14) 2695-2711
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Park JY, Davies JE. Red blood cell and platelet interactions with titanium implant surfaces. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000; 11 (06) 530-539
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Ellingsen JE. Pre-treatment of titanium implants with fluoride improves their retention in bone. J Mater Sci Mater Med 1995; 6 (12) 749-753
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Ellingsen JE, Johansson CB, Wennerberg A, Holmén A. Improved retention and bone-tolmplant contact with fluoride-modified titanium implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004; 19 (05) 659-666
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Davies JE. Mechanisms of endosseous integration. Int J Prosthodont 1998; 11 (05) 391-401
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Trisi P, Lazzara R, Rao W, Rebaudi A. Bone-implant contact and bone quality: evaluation of expected and actual bone contact on machined and osseotite implant surfaces. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2002; 22 (06) 535-545
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Novaes Jr AB, Papalexiou V, Grisi MF, Souza SS, Taba Jr M, Kajiwara JK. Influence of implant microstructure on the osseointegration of immediate implants placed in periodontally infected sites. A histomorphometric study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004; 15 (01) 34-43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Papalexiou V, Novaes Jr AB, Grisi MF, Souza SS, Taba Jr M, Kajiwara JK. Influence of implant microstructure on the dynamics of bone healing around immediate implants placed into periodontally infected sites. A confocal laser scanning microscopic study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004; 15 (01) 44-53
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Yokoyama K, Ichikawa T, Murakami H, Miyamoto Y, Asaoka K. Fracture mechanisms of retrieved titanium screw thread in dental implant. Biomaterials 2002; 23 (12) 2459-2465
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Sul YT, Johansson CB, Röser K, Albrektsson T. Qualitative and quantitative observations of bone tissue reactions to anodised implants. Biomaterials 2002; 23 (08) 1809-1817
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Sul YT, Johansson CB, Jeong Y, Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T. Resonance frequency and removal torque analysis of implants with turned and anodized surface oxides. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002; 13 (03) 252-259
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Rocci A, Martignoni M, Gottlow J. Immediate loading of Brånemark System TiUnite and machined-surface implants in the posterior mandible: a randomized open-ended clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003; 5 (Suppl. 01) 57-63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Jungner M, Lundqvist P, Lundgren S. Oxidized titanium implants (Nobel Biocare TiUnite) compared with turned titanium implants (Nobel Biocare mark III) with respect to implant failure in a group of consecutive patients treated with early functional loading and two-stage protocol. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005; 16 (03) 308-312
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar