Changes in the surface of bone and acid-etched and sandblasted implants following implantation and removal

ABSTRACT

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine whether there are any changes in the surface of bone or implant structures following the removal of a screwed dental implant. Materials and Methods: For this, six individual samples of acid-etched and sandblasted implants from three different manufacturers’ implant systems were used. They were screwed in a D1 bovine bone, and they were removed after primary stabilization. The bone and implant surfaces are evaluated with scanning electron microscope. Results: Through examination of the surfaces of the bone prior to implantation and of the used and unused implant surfaces, it was found that inhomogeneity in the implant surface can cause microcracking in the bone. Conclusions: This is attributed to the stress induced during the implantation of self-tapping implants and suggests that a tap drill may be required in some instances to protect the implant surface.

Key words:

Acid-etched and sandblasted implant - bone surface - implant removal

• REFERENCES

• 1 Feitosa PC, de Lima AP, Silva-Concílio LR, Brandt WC, Neves AC. Stability of external and internal implant connections after a fatigue test. Eur J Dent 2013; 7: 267-71
• 2 Carlsson L, Röstlund T, Albrektsson B, Albrektsson T. Removal torques for polished and rough titanium implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988; 3: 21-4
• 3 Shalabi MM, Wolke JG, Jansen JA. The effects of implant surface roughness and surgical technique on implant fixation in an in vitro model. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006; 17: 172-8
• 4 Bagno A, Di Bello C. Surface treatments and roughness properties of Ti-based biomaterials. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2004; 15: 935-49
• 5 Massaro C, Rotolo P, De Riccardis F, Milella E, Napoli A, Wieland M. et al. Comparative investigation of the surface properties of commercial titanium dental implants. Part I: Chemical composition. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2002; 13: 535-48
• 6 Le Guéhennec L, Soueidan A, Layrolle P, Amouriq Y. Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 844-54
• 7 Le Guehennec L, Goyenvalle E, Lopez-Heredia MA, Weiss P, Amouriq Y, Layrolle P. Histomorphometric analysis of the osseointegration of four different implant surfaces in the femoral epiphyses of rabbits. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008; 19: 1103-10
• 8 Braceras I, De Maeztu MA, Alava JI, Gay-Escoda C. In vivo low-density bone apposition on different implant surface materials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009; 38: 274-8
• 9 Uzun G, Keyf F. Surface characteristics of the implant systems and osseointegration. The Journal of Dental Faculty of Ataturk University. 2007 Suppl 2 43-50
• 10 Ercoli C, Funkenbusch PD, Lee HJ, Moss ME, Graser GN. The influence of drill wear on cutting efficiency and heat production during osteotomy preparation for dental implants: A study of drill durability. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004; 19: 335-49
• 11 Balshe AA, Assad DA, Eckert SE, Koka S, Weaver AL. A retrospective study of the survival of smooth- and rough-surface dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009; 24: 1113-8
• 12 Dávid A, Eitenmüller J, Muhr G, Pommer A, Bär HF, Ostermann PA. et al. Mechanical and histological evaluation of hydroxyapatite-coated, titanium-coated and grit-blasted surfaces under weight-bearing conditions. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1995; 114: 112-8
• 13 Buser D, Schenk RK, Steinemann S, Fiorellini JP, Fox CH, Stich H. Influence of surface characteristics on bone integration of titanium implants. A histomorphometric study in miniature pigs. J Biomed Mater Res 1991; 25: 889-902
• 14 Behnaz E, Ramin M, Abbasi S, Pouya MA, Mahmood F. The effect of implant angulation and splinting on stress distribution in implant body and supporting bone: A finite element analysis. Eur J Dent 2015; 9: 311-8