The influence of surface treatment on the implant roughness pattern

被引:64
|
作者
Rosa, Marcio Borges [1 ]
Albrektsson, Tomas [2 ]
Francischone, Carlos Eduardo [1 ]
Schwartz Filho, Humberto Osvaldo [3 ]
Wennerberg, Ann [4 ]
机构
[1] Sao Leopoldo Mandic Univ, Sch Dent, Dept Postgrad, Div Implantol, Campinas, SP, Brazil
[2] Gothenburg Univ, Dept Biomat, Gothenburg, Sweden
[3] Univ Santo Amaro UNISA, Sch Dent, Div Implantol, Dept Postgrad, Sao Paulo, Brazil
[4] Malmo Univ, Dept Prosthodont, Malmo, Sweden
关键词
Surface treatments; Blasting; Acid etched; Dental implants; Osseointegration; TITANIUM IMPLANTS; REMOVAL TORQUE; PART; BONE; TOPOGRAPHY; OSSEOINTEGRATION; KNOWLEDGE;
D O I
10.1590/S1678-77572012000500010
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
An important parameter for the clinical success of dental implants is the formation of direct contact between the implant and surrounding bone, whose quality is directly influenced by the implant surface roughness. A screw-shaped design and a surface with an average roughness of Sa of 1-2 mu m showed a better result. The combination of blasting and etching has been a commonly used surface treatment technique. The versatility of this type of treatment allows for a wide variation in the procedures in order to obtain the desired roughness. Objectives: To compare the roughness values and morphological characteristics of 04 brands of implants, using the same type of surface treatment. In addition, to compare the results among brands, in order to assess whether the type of treatment determines the values and the characteristics of implant surface roughness. Material and methods: Three implants were purchased directly from each selected company in the market, i.e., 03 Brazilian companies (Biomet 3i of Brazil, Neodent and Titaniumfix) and 01 Korean company (Oneplant). The quantitative or numerical characterization of the roughness was performed using an interferometer. The qualitative analysis of the surface topography obtained with the treatment was analyzed using scanning electron microscopy images. Results: The evaluated implants showed a significant variation in roughness values: Sa for Oneplant was 1.01 mu m; Titaniumfix reached 0.90 mu m; implants from Neodent 0.67 mu m, and Biomet 3i of Brazil 0.53 mu m. Moreover, the SEM images showed very different patterns for the surfaces examined. Conclusions: The surface treatment alone is not able to determine the roughness values and characteristics.
引用
收藏
页码:550 / 555
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness
    Ozgu, Ipek
    Ustun, Kemal
    JOVE-JOURNAL OF VISUALIZED EXPERIMENTS, 2025, (217):
  • [42] Dental Implant Thread Pitch and Its Influence on the Osseointegration Process: An In Vivo Comparison Study
    Orsini, Ester
    Giavaresi, Gianluca
    Trire, Alessandra
    Ottani, Vittoria
    Salgarello, Stefano
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2012, 27 (02) : 383 - 392
  • [43] Anatase Forming Treatment without Surface Morphological Alteration of Dental Implant
    Lupi, Saturnino Marco
    Albini, Benedetta
    Rodriguez y Baena, Arianna
    Lanfre, Giulia
    Galinetto, Pietro
    MATERIALS, 2020, 13 (22) : 1 - 14
  • [44] Bisphosphonates and Their Influence on the Implant Failure: A Systematic Review
    Rebelo, Cristiana Gomes
    Fernandes, Juliana Campos Hasse
    Bernardo, Nuno
    Couto, Patricia
    Fernandes, Gustavo Vicentis Oliveira
    APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL, 2023, 13 (06):
  • [45] Effects of surface treatment on the osseointegration potential of orthodontic mini-implant
    Jeon, Mi-Sun
    Kang, Yoon-Goo
    Mo, Sung-Seo
    Lee, Keun-Hye
    Kook, Yoon-Ah
    Kim, Seong-Hun
    KOREAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS, 2008, 38 (05) : 328 - 336
  • [46] Influence of implant surface topography on early osseointegration: A histological study in human jaws
    Shibli, Jamil Awad
    Grassi, Sauro
    de Figueiredo, Luciene Cristina
    Feres, Magda
    Marcantonio, Elcio, Jr.
    Iezzi, Giovanna
    Piattelli, Adriano
    JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL MATERIALS RESEARCH PART B-APPLIED BIOMATERIALS, 2007, 80B (02) : 377 - 385
  • [47] Effects of Surface Treatment Modification and Implant Design in Implants Placed Crestal and Subcrestally Applying Delayed Loading Protocol
    Sanchez de Val, Jose Eduardo Mate
    Gomez-Moreno, Gerardo
    Ruiz-Linares, Matilde
    Carlos Prados-Frutos, Juan
    Alexandre Gehrke, Sergio
    Luis Calvo-Guirado, Jose
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2017, 28 (02) : 552 - 558
  • [48] How do implant surface characteristics influence peri-implant disease?
    Renvert, Stefan
    Polyzois, Ioannis
    Claffey, Noel
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, 2011, 38 : 214 - 222
  • [49] Influence of the Surface Chemical Composition Differences between Zirconia and Titanium with the Similar Surface Structure and Roughness on Bone Formation
    Tokunaga, Yoshiki
    Hirota, Masatsugu
    Hayakawa, Tohru
    NANOMATERIALS, 2022, 12 (14)
  • [50] Laser-treated stainless steel mini-screw implants: 3D surface roughness, bone-implant contact, and fracture resistance analysis
    Kang, He-Kyong
    Chu, Tien-Min
    Dechow, Paul
    Stewart, Kelton
    Kyung, Hee-Moon
    Liu, Sean Shih-Yao
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS, 2016, 38 (02) : 154 - 162