Etched implants: A comparative surface analysis of four implant systems
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Surface texturing by acid etching has recently become popular among dental implant manufacturers. The aim of this study was to compare the surface topography of four implant systems and to check the reproducibility of the industrial process of each implant system. Three implants per system have been selected from three distinct batches. They were observed under a scanning electron microscope (SEM), and roughness was determined with a contact profilometer by measuring five height‐descriptive parameters (Ra, Rq, RzISO, Rt, and Rsk, a texture parameter Sm, and a hybrid parameter RΔq. The analysis showed that each implant system displayed a distinct surface topography that could not be mistaken. When sandblasting was performed prior to etching, surface topography was a combination of macro‐ and microroughness. The roughness and the amount of remaining sand varied among the batches, showing that the industrial process is not fully developed. Deviation from the released technical information was found for two out of four implant manufacturers. Based on the available biological and clinical data on textured surfaces, it is suggested that it is bone interlocking at the interface that maintains the biological properties of textured surfaces, rather than a strong implant fixation per se. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 69B: 46–57, 2004
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes · Dental materials and restorations · Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (36)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1002/jbm.82025070810.1002/jbm.820250708 ↗
2. Szmukler‐Moncler S · 1996 · 611
3. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199804)40:1<1::AID-JBM1>3.0.CO;2-Q10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199804)40:1<1::AID-JBM1>3.0.CO;2-Q ↗
4. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.192-195.39510.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.192-195.395 ↗
5. Wilke HJ · 1990 · 309
6. 10.1002/jbm.82029121310.1002/jbm.820291213 ↗
7. 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.012004350.x10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.012004350.x ↗
8. Biological properties of acid etched titanium surfaces: Effect of sandblasting on bone anchorage
9. A human histologic analysis of Osseotite and machined surfaces using implants with 2 opposing surfaces
10. Rate of pull‐out strength gain of dual‐etched titanium implants: A comparative study in rabbits
11. 10.1111/j.1708-8240.1998.tb00505.x10.1111/j.1708-8240.1998.tb00505.x ↗
12. 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.120604.x10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.120604.x ↗
13. 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130204.x10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130204.x ↗
14. 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130205.x10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130205.x ↗
15. 15 Jahre tübinger implantat und seine weiterentwicklung zum frialit‐2‐system
16. BeatyKD. U.S. Patent No.. 5 876 453. Implant surface preparation; March 2 1999.
17. SteinemannSG ClaesL. U.S. Patent No. 5 456 723. Metallic implant anchorable to bone tissue for replacing a broken or diseased bone; October 10 1995.
18. The Frialit‐2 implant system: Five‐year clinical experience in single tooth and immediately post‐extraction applications
19. A 7‐year life table analysis from a prospective study on ITI implants with special emphasis on the use of short implants. Results from a private practice
20. Removal torque values of titanium implants in the maxilla of miniature pigs
21. Suggested guidelines for the topographic evaluation of implant surfaces
22. 10.1016/S0021-9290(00)00045-210.1016/S0021-9290(00)00045-2 ↗
23. 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00002.x10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00002.x ↗
24. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(1999)48:4<440::AID-JBM7>3.0.CO;2-510.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(1999)48:4<440::AID-JBM7>3.0.CO;2-5 ↗
25. 10.1002/jbm.104910.1002/jbm.1049 ↗
26. A prospective multicenter clinical study of the Osseotite implant: Four‐year interim report
27. Mechanisms of endosseous integration
28. Gross U · 1990 · 303
29. Muller‐Mai CM · 2000 · 457
30. 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.090606.x10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.090606.x ↗
31. 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2003.120908.x10.1034/j.1600-0501.2003.120908.x ↗
32. 10.1007/BF0070529110.1007/BF00705291 ↗
33. 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070109.x10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070109.x ↗
34. 10.1046/j.0909-8836..t01-2-.x10.1046/j.0909-8836..t01-2-.x ↗
35. Surgical determinants of clinical success of osseointegrated implants: A review of literature
36. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199905)45:2<75::AID-JBM1>3.0.CO;2-P10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199905)45:2<75::AID-JBM1>3.0.CO;2-P ↗