91
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    4
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Osseointegration of zirconia implants compared with titanium: an in vivo study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Titanium and titanium alloys are widely used for fabrication of dental implants. Since the material composition and the surface topography of a biomaterial play a fundamental role in osseointegration, various chemical and physical surface modifications have been developed to improve osseous healing. Zirconia-based implants were introduced into dental implantology as an altenative to titanium implants. Zirconia seems to be a suitable implant material because of its tooth-like colour, its mechanical properties and its biocompatibility. As the osseointegration of zirconia implants has not been extensively investigated, the aim of this study was to compare the osseous healing of zirconia implants with titanium implants which have a roughened surface but otherwise similar implant geometries.

          Methods

          Forty-eight zirconia and titanium implants were introduced into the tibia of 12 minipigs. After 1, 4 or 12 weeks, animals were sacrificed and specimens containing the implants were examined in terms of histological and ultrastructural techniques.

          Results

          Histological results showed direct bone contact on the zirconia and titanium surfaces. Bone implant contact as measured by histomorphometry was slightly better on titanium than on zirconia surfaces. However, a statistically significant difference between the two groups was not observed.

          Conclusion

          The results demonstrated that zirconia implants with modified surfaces result in an osseointegration which is comparable with that of titanium implants.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Osteoinduction, osteoconduction and osseointegration.

          Osteoinduction is the process by which osteogenesis is induced. It is a phenomenon regularly seen in any type of bone healing process. Osteoinduction implies the recruitment of immature cells and the stimulation of these cells to develop into preosteoblasts. In a bone healing situation such as a fracture, the majority of bone healing is dependent on osteoinduction. Osteoconduction means that bone grows on a surface. This phenomenon is regularly seen in the case of bone implants. Implant materials of low biocompatibility such as copper, silver and bone cement shows little or no osteoconduction. Osseointegration is the stable anchorage of an implant achieved by direct bone-to-implant contact. In craniofacial implantology, this mode of anchorage is the only one for which high success rates have been reported. Osseointegration is possible in other parts of the body, but its importance for the anchorage of major arthroplasties is under debate. Ingrowth of bone in a porous-coated prosthesis may or may not represent osseointegration.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Zirconia as a ceramic biomaterial.

            Zirconia ceramics have several advantages over other ceramic materials, due to the transformation toughening mechanisms operating in their microstructure that can give to components made out of them, very interesting mechanical properties. The research on the use of zirconia ceramics as biomaterials started about twenty years ago, and now zirconia (Y-YZP) is in clinical use in THR, but developments are in progress for application in other medical devices. Recent developments have concentrated on the chemistry of precursors, in forming and sintering processes, and on surface finish of components. Today's main applications of zirconia ceramics is in THR ball heads. This review takes into account the main results achieved up to now, and is focused on the role that microstructural characteristics play on the TZP ceramics behaviour in ball heads, namely mechanical properties and their stability, wear of the UHMWPE paired to TZP, and their influence on biocompatibility.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Implant surface roughness and bone healing: a systematic review.

              A systematic review was performed on studies investigating the effects of implant surface roughness on bone response and implant fixation. We searched the literature using MEDLINE from 1953 to 2003. Inclusion criteria were: (1) abstracts of animal studies investigating implant surface roughness and bone healing; (2) observations of three-month bone healing, surface topography measurements, and biomechanical tests; (3) provision of data on surface roughness, bone-to-implant contact, and biomechanical test values. The literature search revealed 5966 abstracts. There were 470, 23, and 14 articles included in the first, second, and third selection steps, respectively. Almost all papers showed an enhanced bone-to-implant contact with increasing surface roughness. Six comparisons were significantly positive for the relationship of bone-to-implant contact and surface roughness. Also, a significant relation was found between push-out strength and surface roughness. Unfortunately, the eventually selected studies were too heterogeneous for inference of data. Nevertheless, the statistical analysis on the available data provided supportive evidence for a positive relationship between bone-to-implant contact and surface roughness.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Head Face Med
                Head & Face Medicine
                BioMed Central
                1746-160X
                2008
                11 December 2008
                : 4
                : 30
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Cranio- and Maxillofacial Surgery, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany
                [2 ]Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Section of Materials Sciences, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany
                [3 ]Department of Operative and Preventive Dentistry and Endodontics, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany
                [4 ]Department of Cranio- and Maxillofacial Surgery, Westfalian Wilhelms-University, Münster, Germany
                [5 ]Department of Oral and Maxillo-Facial Surgery, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
                Article
                1746-160X-4-30
                10.1186/1746-160X-4-30
                2614983
                19077228
                17bddc9d-4296-4730-8ee1-e01ce0aa5717
                Copyright © 2008 Depprich et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 8 July 2008
                : 11 December 2008
                Categories
                Research

                Orthopedics
                Orthopedics

                Comments

                Comment on this article