Since dental implants must withstand relatively large forces and moments in function, a better understanding of in vivo bone response to loading would aid implant design. The following topics are essential in this problem. (1) Theoretical models and experimental data are available for understanding implant loading as an aid to case planning. (2) At least for several months after surgery, bone healing in gaps between implant and bone as well as in pre-existing damaged bone will determine interface structure and properties. The ongoing healing creates a complicated environment. (3) Recent studies reveal that an interfacial cement line exists between the implant surface and bone for titanium and hydroxyapatite (HA). Since cement lines in normal bone have been identified as weak interfaces, a cement line at a bone-biomaterial interface may also be a weak point. Indeed, data on interfacial shear and tensile "bond" strengths are consistent with this idea. (4) Excessive interfacial micromotion early after implantation interferes with local bone healing and predisposes to a fibrous tissue interface instead of osseointegration. (5) Large strains can damage bone. For implants that have healed in situ for several months before being loaded, data support the hypothesis that interfacial overload occurs if the strains are excessive in interfacial bone. While bone "adaptation" to loading is a long-standing concept in bone physiology, researchers may sometimes be too willing to accept this paradigm as an exclusive explanation of in vivo tissue responses during experiments, while overlooking confounding variables, alternative (non-mechanical) explanations, and the possibility that different types of bone (e.g., woven bone, Haversian bone, plexiform bone) may have different sensitivities to loading under healing vs. quiescent conditions.

No abstract

Evidence that nanoscale surface properties stimulate and guide various molecular and biological processes at the implant/tissue interface is fostering a new trend in designing implantable metals. Cutting-edge expertise and techniques drawn from widely separated fields, such as nanotechnology, materials engineering and biology, have been advantageously exploited to nanoengineer surfaces in ways that control and direct these processes in predictable manners. In this review, we present and discuss the state-of-the-art of nanotechnology-based approaches currently used to modify the surface of metals used for orthopedic and dental applications, and also briefly consider their use in the cardiovascular field. The effects of nanoengineered surfaces on various in vitro molecular and cellular events are firstly discussed. Importantly, this review also provides an overview of in vivo and clinical studies with nanostructured metallic implants, and addresses the potential influence of nanotopography on biomechanical events at interfaces. Ultimately the objective of this work is to give the readership a comprehensive picture of the current advances, future developments and challenges in the application of the infinitesimally small to biomedical surface science. We believe that an integrated understanding of the in vitro and particularly of the in vivo behavior is mandatory for the proper exploitation of nanostructured implantable metals and, as a matter of fact, all biomaterials.

Background: Clinicians need quality research data to decide which dental implant should be selected for patient treatment. Aim(s)/objective(s): To present the scientific evidence for claims of relationship between characteristics of dental implants and clinical performance . Study design: Systematic search of promotional material and Internet sites to find claims of implant superiority related to specific characteristics of the implant, and of the dental research literature to find scientific support for the claims. Main outcome measures: Critical appraisal of the research documentation to establish the scientific external and internal validity as a basis for the likelihood of reported treatment outcomes as a function of implant characteristics. Results: More than 220 implant brands have been identified , produced by about 80 manufacturers. The implants are made from different materials, undergo different surface treatments and come in different shapes, lengths , widths and forms . The dentist can in theory choose among more than 2,000 implants in a given patient treatment situation . Implants made from titanium and titanium alloys appear to perform well clinically in properly surgically prepared bone, regardless of small variations of shapes and forms . Various surface treatments are currently being developed to improve the capacity of a more rapid anchorage of the implant into bone . A substantial number of claims made by different manufacturers on alleged superiority due to design characteristics are not based on sound and longterm clinical scientific research. Implants are , in some parts of the world, manufactured and sold with no demonstration of adherence to any international standards . Conclusions: The scientific literature does not provide any clear directives to claims of alleged benefits of specific morphological characteristics of dental implants.

Due to the aging population and the increasing need for total joint replacements, osseointegration is of a great interest for various clinical disciplines. Our objective was to investigate the molecular and cellular foundation that underlies this process. Here, we used an in vivo mouse model to study the cellular and molecular response in three distinct areas of unloaded implants: the periosteum, the gap between implant and cortical bone, and the marrow space. Our analyses began with the early phases of healing, and continued until the implants were completely osseointegrated. We investigated aspects of osseointegration ranging from vascularization, cell proliferation, differentiation, and bone remodeling. In doing so, we gained an understanding of the healing mechanisms of different skeletal tissues during unloaded implant osseointegration. To continue our analysis, we used a micromotion device to apply a defined physical stimulus to the implants, and in doing so, we dramatically enhanced bone formation in the peri-implant tissue. By comparing strain measurements with cellular and molecular analyses, we developed an understanding of the correlation between strain magnitudes and fate decisions of cells shaping the skeletal regenerate.