Surface Coatings of Dental Implants: A Review

Inchingolo, Angelo Michele; Marinelli, Grazia; Ferrante, Laura; Vecchio, Gaetano Del; Viapiano, Fabio; Inchingolo, Alessio Danilo; Mancini, Antonio; Annicchiarico, Ciro; Inchingolo, Francesco; Dipalma, Gianna; Minetti, Elio; Palermo, Andrea; Patano, Assunta

doi:10.3390/jfb14050287

Cited by 28 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 102 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They concluded that rough surfaces and load implants resulted in higher values of every parameter studied. Another recent review that aimed to analyze different implant surfaces and try to identify the ideal structure from a clinical and durability point of view [52] concluded that treated surfaces allowed better osseointegration and better cell proliferation, as long as a better propensity for epithelial cell adhesion and attachment, proliferation, and differentiation of osteoblastic cells. They also suggest that 3D printed implants deserve further investigation to help improve biocompatibility.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D-Printed Dental Implants Immediately Loaded to Support a Full-Arch Fixed Rehabilitation: 24 months Follow-up

Formiga,

Fuller,

Shibli

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Immediate load of full-arch rehabilitations over implants, specially over 4 implants are very well documented in the literature. More recently, the use of computed surgical guides to help the planning and the execution of these treatments, in many situations without the need of raising a flap, and diminishing the appearance of hematomas, bleeding and with less trauma to the patient has gained preference among implantologists. The objective of this case report is to show a clinical case of an immediate load full-arch fixed rehabilitation over 4 implants produced by 3D printing manufacturing technology, and placed with a computed surgical guide, in the same appointment, and the 24 months follow-up. The patient returned after 3 months to replace the immediate temporary fixed prosthesis for a new one, with metallic bar, better teeth and more delicate. Soft and hard tissue around the implants seemed to be stable, without signs of inflammation, either on the 3 or the 24 months follow-up. 3D printing of implants by direct metal laser sintering is a technology that seems to be promising for oral implantology, with solid studies showing reliable results, as seen in this single case. More clinical studies are necessary to testify its efficacy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D-Printed Dental Implants Immediately Loaded to Support a Full-Arch Fixed Rehabilitation: 24 months Follow-up

Formiga,

Fuller,

Shibli

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The dental implant coating process comprises six primary techniques: Plasma spraying, nanospray drying, sol-gel, hydrothermal, self-assembly, and 3D printing [13]. Currently, a range of compounds are used to coat dental implants, including polyhydroxyalkanoates, calcium phosphate, carbon, bisphosphonates, hydroxyapatite (HA), bone-stimulating chemicals, bioactive glass, bioactive ceramics, collagen, and chitosan [56]. Among these particles, HA is one of the popular bioceramic substances often used as a coating material.…”

Section: Additive Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Titanium Surface Modification Techniques to Enhance Osteoblasts and Bone Formation for Dental Implants: A Narrative Review on Current Advances

Tuikampee,

Chaijareenont,

Rungsiyakull

et al. 2024

Metals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surface modifications for titanium, a material of choice for dental implants, can greatly alter the surface micro/nanotopography and composition of implants, leading to notable enhancements in their hydrophilicity, mechanical properties, osseointegration performance, and antibacterial performance, as well as their impacts on osteoblast activity and bone formation processes. This article aims to update titanium surface modification techniques for dental implants from the past to the present, along with their effects on osteoblasts and bone formation, by thoroughly summarizing findings from published studies. Peer-reviewed articles published in English consisting of in vitro, in vivo, and clinical studies on titanium dental implant surface treatments were searched in Google Scholar, PubMed/MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, and the Scopus databases from January 1983 to December 2023 and included in this review. The previous studies show that implant surface roughness, condition, and hydrophilicity are crucial for osteoblast adhesion and growth. While various techniques enhance osseointegration comparably, one of the most common approaches to accomplishing these properties is sandblasting large-grit acid etching surface treatment and coating with hydroxyapatite or chitosan. In conclusion, this review points out the efficacy of different subtraction and addition techniques in enhancing the surface properties of titanium dental implants, promoting favorable outcomes in terms of osteoblast activity and bone formation in various degrees. However, most existing studies predominantly compare treated and non-treated titanium, revealing a need for more comprehensive studies comparing the effects of various modification techniques. Moreover, further investigation of factors playing a role in the dynamic osseointegration process in addition to osteoblasts and their functions, as well as improved surface modification techniques for the treatment of compromised patients, is greatly required.

show abstract

“…Змочуваність і поверхнева енергія -ключові параметри при адгезії та поширенні остеобластних клітин [18]. Грубозернисту поверхню з піскоструминною обробкою і протравленням кислотою (SLA), завдяки гідрофільності, використовують для найновіших комерційних зубних імплантатів [19]. У великому сімействі поверхонь типу SLA розрізняють три підгрупи.…”

Section: обговоренняunclassified

Evaluation of anti-inflammatory properties on the surface of dental implants depending on the type of processing (Part 1)

Varzhapetian,

Shyshkin,

Strogonova

2024

Pathologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim. To study of the anti-inflammatory properties of the surface of commercial dental implants with different processing methods using the example of the course of the first stage of implantation. Materials and methods. Dental implants made of titanium with 3D Active and Xpeed surface treatment were used. The surface microstructure and biocompatibility of the samples, surface corrosion, elemental analysis of the surface was studied. The assessment of the severity of peri-implantitis and mucositis based on the depth of the peri-implant pocket and bleeding during probing, determination of the coefficient of stability of implants (KSI) is given. Median test (χ2), Kruskel–Wallis test (H), univariate variance analysis (F) were used for multiple comparison of samples. The difference in parameters was considered statistically significant at the p ≤ 0.05 level. Results. The surfaces of 3D Active implants are monolithic with rounded pores in the form of wells of different diameters and depths; the upper layer of the Xpeed sample consists of closely adjacent to each other fragments of a rectangular or polygonal shape, in the form of tiles, leaving rectangular faces on the outside. On the surface of the 3D Active samples, in addition to oxygen and carbon, there was phosphorus – 5.04 wt%, as well as S, Ca, Na, Zr, Zn which weight percentage did not exceed 1 wt%. A significant difference in the elemental composition of Xpeed implants was the presence of chlorine 0.07 wt% and 0.93 wt%, silicon – 0.10 wt% and 0.14 wt%, aluminum 0.06 wt% and 0.23 wt%, respectively, with the latter has a significant advantage in these elements. Xpeed had an insignificant weight percentage of iron in its composition – 0.12 wt%. The assessment of cell adhesion to the surface of the samples on the first day of incubation demonstrated that the samples with the Xpeed and 3D Active surfaces did not have a statistically significant difference between them. Also, on the 7th day of incubation, the level of reduction of resazurin in Xpeed was lower, no significant difference was observed (p > 0.05). The clinical signs of bone tissue resorption were identified in 36.4 % of 3D Active implants and 60.0 % of Xpeed implants (p = 0.3); inflammation of the mucous membrane – in the areas of installation of 54.5 % of 3D Active implants. No signs of mucositis were detected around the Xpeed implants (p = 0.23). 9.1 % of 3D Active implants were “lost”; no cases of loss of Xpeed implants have been identified. The KSI of 3D Active – 64.0 ± 5.9 units, Xpeed – 65.1 ± 3.7 units. Conclusions. According to KSI indicators, titanium implants with Xpeed coating (65.1 ± 3.7 units) and 3D Active (64.0 ± 5.9 units) showed the same capabilities. Bone tissue resorption without signs of inflammation is more common around Xpeed-coated implants than 3D Active-coated implants. Clinical signs of inflammation are more frequent and more severe around implants with a 3D Active coating, which affected both the severity of the course of the first stage of implantation and its results. Xpeed-coated implants are more reliable than 3D Active: loss among 3D Active implants was 9.1 %, Xpeed – 0.0 %.

show abstract

Surface Coatings of Dental Implants: A Review

Cited by 28 publications

References 102 publications

3D-Printed Dental Implants Immediately Loaded to Support a Full-Arch Fixed Rehabilitation: 24 months Follow-up

3D-Printed Dental Implants Immediately Loaded to Support a Full-Arch Fixed Rehabilitation: 24 months Follow-up

Titanium Surface Modification Techniques to Enhance Osteoblasts and Bone Formation for Dental Implants: A Narrative Review on Current Advances

Evaluation of anti-inflammatory properties on the surface of dental implants depending on the type of processing (Part 1)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About