Accelerated Osteogenic Differentiation and Bone Formation on Zirconia with Surface Grooves Created with Fiber Laser Irradiation

Taniguchi, Yusuke; Kakura, Kae; Yamamoto, Katsuki; Kakemoto, Hirofumi; Yamazaki, Jun

doi:10.1111/cid.12366

Cited by 34 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In cynomolgus monkeys, one study observed comparable results for both materials after 56 weeks of follow-up and 20 weeks of (2015), Richardson, Klawitter, Sauer, Pruitt and Hulbert (1975), Saulacic, Erdosi, Bosshardt, Gruber and Buser (2014), Scarano, Di Carlo, Quaranta and Piattelli (2003), Schreiner, Schroeder-Boersch, Schwarz and Scheller (2002), Shon et al (2014Shon et al ( , 2015, Taniguchi, Kakura, Yamamoto, Kido and Yamazaki (2016) Review articles 18 Andreiotelli and Khol (2009b), Apratim et al (2015), Assal (2013), Bosshardt, Chappuis and Buser (2017) (2009) Studies investigating alumina dental implants 1 Nordlund, Zetterqvist and Oden (1989) Experimental studies investigating titanium implants coated with zirconia 1 Sollazzo et al (2008) loading. The authors evaluated mean values of 72.9% and 67.4%…”

Section: Monkeysmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zirconia compared to titanium dental implants in preclinical studies—A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Roehling

Schlegel

Woelfler

et al. 2019

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To evaluate whether zirconia implants demonstrate differences in hard and soft tissue integration compared to titanium implants in preclinical studies. Material and Methods In March 2017, electronic (MEDLINE, EMBASE) and hand search was performed to identify preclinical studies comparing zirconia and titanium implants. Primary outcomes were bone‐to‐implant contact (BIC) and removal torque out (RTQ), respectively, push‐in (PI) measurements. Secondary outcomes included biologic width (BW) dimensions. Results A total of 37 studies were included for data extraction after screening of 91 from 1,231 selected titles. Thirty‐seven experimental studies using six different species were identified. The follow‐up periods ranged between 0.4 and 56 weeks. For titanium, mean values of 59.1% (95% CI: 53.3 – 64.8), 102.6 Ncm (95% CI: 81.5 – 123.6), and 25.1 N (95% CI: 20.2 – 30.0) for BIC, RTQ, and PI were estimated, respectively. The mean values for zirconia were 55.9% (95% CI: 51.6 – 60.1), 71.5 Ncm (95% CI: 51.1 – 91.9), and 22.0 N (95% CI: 13.2 – 30.7) for corresponding parameters. Confounding factors such as animal species, implant material, loading protocol, and study or loading duration significantly influenced the outcomes. Similar qualitative soft tissue integration was reported for zirconia and titanium implants. However, faster maturation processes of epithelial and connective tissues around zirconia implants were assumed. Quantitatively, similar BW dimensions were evaluated for titanium (3.5 mm; 95% CI: 2.9 – 4.2) and zirconia (3.2 mm; 95% CI: 2.7 – 3.7), whereas the loading protocol significantly influenced the outcomes. Conclusions Zirconia and titanium implants demonstrate a similar soft and hard tissue integration capacity. However, titanium tended to show a faster initial osseointegration process compared to zirconia. Importantly, not only material characteristics but predominantly animal species and study protocols can significantly influence the outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Monkeysmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zirconia compared to titanium dental implants in preclinical studies—A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Roehling

Schlegel

Woelfler

et al. 2019

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These results are in agreement with a previous study that showed that cells on polished surfaces proliferated more rapidly than those on the rough surfaces, 36 but was not consistent with another study that stated that cell proliferation was significantly greater on rough zirconia surfaces than on smooth surfaces. 45 The sample discs used in this study were minimally rough, while samples from Taniguchi's study 45 were moderately rough. When performing zirconia surface roughing, it is important to achieve the minimum effective roughness without jeopardizing the mechanical properties.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Analysis of osteogenic potential on 3mol% yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystals and two different niobium oxide containing zirconia ceramics

Hein

Cho

et al. 2018

J Adv Prosthodont

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSEThis study was performed to evaluate the osteogenic potential of 3mol% yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystals (3Y-TZP) and niobium oxide containing Y-TZPs with specific ratios, new (Y,Nb)-TZPs, namely YN4533 and YN4533/Al20 discs.MATERIALS AND METHODS3Y-TZP, YN4533 and YN4533/Al20 discs (15 mm diameter and 1 mm thickness) were prepared and their average surface roughness (Ra) and surface topography were analyzed using 3-D confocal laser microscope (CLSM) and scanning electron microscope (SEM). Mouse pre-osteoblast MC3T3-E1 cells were seeded onto all zirconia discs and evaluated with regard to cell attachment and morphology by (CLSM), cell proliferation by PicoGreen assay, and cell differentiation by Reverse-Transcription PCR and Quantitative Real-Time PCR, and alkaline phosphatase (Alp) staining.RESULTSThe cellular morphology of MC3T3-E1 pre-osteoblasts was more stretched on a smooth surface than on a rough surface, regardless of the material. Cellular proliferation was higher on smooth surfaces, but there were no significant differences between 3Y-TZP, YN4533, and YN4533/Al20. Osteoblast differentiation patterns on YN4533 and YN4533/Al20 were similar to or slightly higher than seen in 3Y-TZP. Although there were no significant differences in bone marker gene expression (alkaline phosphatase and osteocalcin), Alp staining indicated better osteoblast differentiation on YN4533 and YN4533/Al20 compared to 3Y-TZP.CONCLUSIONBased on these results, niobium oxide containing Y-TZPs have comparable osteogenic potential to 3Y-TZP and are expected to be suitable alternative ceramics dental implant materials to titanium for aesthetically important areas.

show abstract

“…Moreover, under laser treatment, the bone-implant contact ratio and removal torque on zirconia implants placed in rat tibiae were increased. It was suggested that laser irradiation produced adequate surface roughening of zirconia to support osseointegration 49) . It is noteworthy that another study showed that laser surface treatment showed positive effect on the viability of L929 cells 50) .…”

Section: Laser Irradiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

An introduction of biological performance of zirconia with different surface characteristics: A review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zirconia (ZrO2) ceramic is widely used in dentistry as a clinical dental biomaterial. In this review, we are focusing on and summarizing the biological performance of zirconia under different surface characteristics. We have included an initial tissue cell attachment study on zirconia and bacterial adhesion on zirconia. Our results suggest that surface modifications applied on zirconia may change the interfacial surface characteristics e.g. surface roughness, surface free energy, and chemistry of zirconia. The modifications also result in advanced biological performance of zirconia, including enhanced tissue cell attachment and reduction of bacterial adhesion. The recent laboratory research has provided many interesting modification methods and showed clinically interesting and promising outcomes. A few of the outcomes are validated and have been applied in clinical dentistry.

show abstract

Accelerated Osteogenic Differentiation and Bone Formation on Zirconia with Surface Grooves Created with Fiber Laser Irradiation

Abstract: Our results suggest that fiber laser irradiation produces adequate surface roughening of zirconia ceramics to support osseointegration.

Cited by 34 publications

References 35 publications

Zirconia compared to titanium dental implants in preclinical studies—A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Zirconia compared to titanium dental implants in preclinical studies—A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Analysis of osteogenic potential on 3mol% yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystals and two different niobium oxide containing zirconia ceramics

An introduction of biological performance of zirconia with different surface characteristics: A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About