Biomechanical comparison of different surface modifications for dental implants
Ferguson, Stephen × Langhoff, Jens Voelter, Katrin von Rechenberg, Brigitte Scharnweber, Dieter Bierbaum, Susanne Schnabelrauch, Matthias Kautz, Armin Frauchiger, Vinzenz Mueller, Thomas van Lenthe, Harry Schlottig, Falko #
Quintessence Pub. Co.
International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants vol:23 issue:6 pages:1037-1046
Purpose: The use of osseointegrated dental implants is a predictable and successful treatment method for functional restoration of the endentulous patient. A satisfactory clinical outcome relies on primary stability for immediate load bearing. While the geometric design of an implant contributes towards mechanical stability, the nature of the implant surface itself is of critical importance for achieving solid osseointegration.
Biomechanical and microCT evaluation of the time course of implant osseointegration was performed to compare alternative structural, chemical and biochemical and/or pharmaceutical surface treatments, using an identical established implant design.
Materials and Methods: Dental implants with the same geometry, but with six different surface treatments, were tested in vivo in a sheep model (pelvis). The peri-implant bone density and the removal torque were compared 2, 4 and 8 weeks after implantation. Implant surfaces tested were: sandblasted and acid etched Ti, sandblasted and etched zirconia, calcium phosphate (CaP) coated Ti, anodic plasma-chemical (APC) surface modified Ti, bisphosphonate-immobilized Ti and collagen (containing chondroitin sulphate) coated Ti.
Results: All dental implants were well integrated at the time of sacrifice. There were no significant differences observed in peri-implant bone density between implant groups. After 8 weeks of healing, removal torque values for Ti, (Ti + CaP), (Ti + Bisphos) and (Ti + Collagen +CS) were significantly higher than those of Zirconia and (Ti + APC). After 2 and weeks of healing, a trend towards greater removal torque values was observed for (Ti + Bisphos) and (Ti + Collagen + CS).
Conclusions: While the sandblasted and acid-etched Ti implant can still be considered the reference standard surface for dental implants, functional surface modifications such as bisphosphonate immobilization or collagen coating seem to enhance early peri-implant bone formation and should be further studied.