Literature DB >> 22319766

Surface characterization of SLActive dental implants.

Spiros Zinelis1, Nick Silikas, Andrew Thomas, Karen Syres, George Eliades.   

Abstract

The aim of the study was to characterize the surface chemistry, hydration capacity, topography and roughness of the root part of a hydrophilic sandblasted and acid-etched titanium dental implant (SLActive). Implants as received (SAR), after water rinsing (SAW) and after ultrasonication in water (SAU) were subjected to x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) elemental and binding state analysis. Scanning electron microscopy plus energy dispersive x-ray microanalysis (SEM/EDX), reflection Fourier transform infrared microspectroscopy (RFTIRM) and hydration/ dehydration cycling by environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM), were performed in SAR, whereas SAU implants were subjected to 3D-optical profilometry and SEM. For all the experiments, a conventional sandblasted and acid-etched implant (SLA ) of the same manufacturer was used as control. XPS showed lower mean C content in SAR than SLA, but not significantly different. In SAW, the C and O contents were increased. Significantly reduced C and increased Ti and O contents were found in SAU. Residual Na phases, other than NaCl, were traced in all SLActive groups. SAR demonstrated higher [-OH]/O2- ratio than SLA . EDX documented higher O, Na, Cl and lower Ti content in SAR. More -OH contributions were probed on SAR in comparison with SLA by RFTI RM. Ti-O peaks assigned to anatase, rutile and amorphous phases were found in both implant groups. The ESEM study revealed a full rehydration capacity in SAR, in contrast to SLA. No differences were found in the topography of SAU and SLA implant surfaces under the SEM. However, significantly greater values in spatial and functional roughness parameters were encountered in SAU. The increased surface hydroxylated titanium content and the greater spatial and functional roughness parameters, may explain the enhanced biological activity documented for SLActive in comparison with SLA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22319766

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Esthet Dent        ISSN: 1862-0612


  6 in total

Review 1.  A review on the wettability of dental implant surfaces II: Biological and clinical aspects.

Authors:  Rolando A Gittens; Lutz Scheideler; Frank Rupp; Sharon L Hyzy; Jürgen Geis-Gerstorfer; Zvi Schwartz; Barbara D Boyan
Journal:  Acta Biomater       Date:  2014-04-05       Impact factor: 8.947

2.  Resonance frequency analysis of dental implants placed at the posterior maxilla varying the surface treatment only: A randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Marcelo M Novellino; Newton Sesma; Piero R Zanardi; Dalva C Laganá
Journal:  Clin Implant Dent Relat Res       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 3.932

3.  Comparison of removal torques between laser-etched and modified sandblasted acid-etched Ti implant surfaces in rabbit tibias.

Authors:  Kyung-Soon Park; Abdel Ghani Ibrahim Al Awamleh; Sung-Am Cho
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2018-02-12       Impact factor: 1.904

4.  Microscopic Characterization of Bioactivate Implant Surfaces: Increasing Wettability Using Salts and Dry Technology.

Authors:  Francesco Gianfreda; Donato Antonacci; Carlo Raffone; Maurizio Muzzi; Valeria Pistilli; Patrizio Bollero
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-17       Impact factor: 3.623

5.  RhoA controls Wnt upregulation on microstructured titanium surfaces.

Authors:  Simone Lumetti; Silvia Mazzotta; Sara Ferrillo; Maddalena Piergianni; Marilina Piemontese; Giovanni Passeri; Guido Maria Macaluso; Carlo Galli
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-05-14       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 6.  Binary titanium alloys as dental implant materials-a review.

Authors:  Xiaotian Liu; Shuyang Chen; James K H Tsoi; Jukka Pekka Matinlinna
Journal:  Regen Biomater       Date:  2017-09-23
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.