Untitled

Abstract

The surfaces of five commercially available titanium implants (Brånemark Nobel Biocare, 3i ICE, 3i OSSEOTITE, ITI-TPS, and ITI-SLA) were compared by scanning electron microscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectroscopy. All five implant types were screw-shaped and fabricated from commercially pure (cp) titanium, but their surface properties differed both as regards surface morphology and surface chemical composition. The macro- and microstructure of the implant surfaces were investigated by scanning electron microscopy. The surfaces chemical composition was determined using the surface-sensitive analytical techniques of X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy and time-of-flight secondary ion spectrometry. Surface topographies were found to reflect the type of mechanical/chemical fabrication procedures applied by the manufacturers. The titanium oxide (passive) layer thickness was similar (5-6 nm) and typical for oxide films grown at or near room temperature. A variety of elements and chemical compounds not related to the metal composition were found on some implant types. They ranged from inorganic material such as sodium chloride to specific organic compounds believed to be due to contamination during fabrication or storage. The experimental findings are believed to make a contribution to a better understanding of the interplay between industrial fabrication procedure and physico-chemical implant surface properties.

Chemical and topographic analysis of treated surfaces of five different commercial dental titanium implants

“…However, it is important to note that only two specimens per type of implant were investigated. With such limited sample investigation no conclusions can be drawn with regard to the degree to which these samples are typical of the manufacturer's production, neither within the particular batch nor between batches 11 . On the other hand, the experimental findings and the differences between the various types of surfaces turned to be characteristic for different areas of the same device as well as between the two specimens investigated per implant type 11 .…”

“…Ti 2p3/2 were deconvoluted to TiO 2 at 458.67 ± 0.14 eV, Ti 2 O 3 + TiO at 456.25 ± 0.36 eV, and Ti metal at 453.22 ± 1.81 eV ( Table 5). The deconvolutions were performed according to the other authors 11 . The FWHM was greater for group 2 implants for TiO 2 peaks of Ti 2p and showed rather similar features between the other groups (Tables 4 and 5).…”

“…The deconvolution is straightforward as well as the assignment to hydrocarbon (285.0 eV), C-O species (~286 eV) and COO species (288-298 eV) 11 . The presence of carbon in different chemical environments is typical for titanium (and other metal) oxide surfaces.…”

“…This is a consequence of the tendency of titanium surfaces to readily adsorb organic components during fabrication (e.g. lubricants) or from the ambient atmosphere during storage 11 . Few additional elements were detected by XPS in very low concentrations.…”

Surface characterization of titanium Based dental implants

“…These materials are known to have a combination of good properties making them particularly relevant and suited for biomedical applications. Titanium shows a favorable combination of intrinsic properties for the fabrication of dental implants such as low specific weight, high strength to weight ratio, low modulus of elasticity, very high corrosion resistance and excellent general biocompatibility [3]. The passive oxide layer that forms on the titanium implant surfaces protects the underlying metal from further oxidation and allows the osseointegration.…”