The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Wettability of titanium implants depending upon surface properties

타이타늄 표면 처리 특성에 따른 젖음성에 관한 연구

  • Han, Young-Soo (Advanced Prosthodontics, Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry, Korea University) ;
  • Shin, Sang-Wan (Advanced Prosthodontics, Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry, Korea University)
  • 한영수 (고려대학교 임상치의학대학원 고급치과보철학과) ;
  • 신상완 (고려대학교 임상치의학대학원 고급치과보철학과 대학원)
  • Published : 2009.01.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Statement of problem: When an implant is fixed, a fixture comes into contact with a tissue fluid. Adhesion of a tissue fluid to a surface of implant is various case by case. Purpose: The ultimate goal of this work is to analyze a correlation between a surface roughness and wettability of implant specimens. A measurement for wettability is performed considering 4 types of specimen implant with surface treatments different from each other to investigate the change of wettability with the elapse of time. Material and methods: Firstly, 20 specimens of titanium were prepared. The specimen were made of a commercial Titanium Grade IV with the diameter of 10 mm and the thickness of 1 mm. According to the method of surface treatment, the specimens were classified into 4 groups of 5 specimens per group. Group A: Machined Surface Group B: Anodized surface Group C: RBM (HA blasting) surface Group D: CMP (calcium methaphosphate) coating surface. Surface roughness of specimen was measured using SV-3000S4 (Mituyoto, Japan). The measurement was based on the standard of JIS1994. Sessile drop method was used to measure the wettability, which measures contact angle between implant disc and saline with the time interval of 5, 10, and 15 seconds. SPSS 11.0 was used to analyze the collected data. In order to analyze the difference of wettability and surface roughness according to implant surface treatment method. The statistical significance was tested with the confidence level of 95%. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the correlation of surface roughness and wettability. Results: The difference of surface roughness was statistically significant in the order of Group C ($1.69{\pm}0.26$), Group D ($1.58{\pm}0.16$), Group B ($0.78{\pm}0.14$) Group A ($0.18{\pm}0.05$). The wettability has also a statistically significant difference, which was in the order of group B ($17.70{\pm}2.66$), Group C ($27.86{\pm}4.52$), Group D ($66.28{\pm}3.70$) Group A ($70.52{\pm}8.00$). There was no difference in wettability with the passage of time. Conclusions: 1. The surface roughness was high in the order of RBM, CMP, Anodized, Machined group (P<.05). 2. The wettability was high in the order of Anodized, RBM, CMP, Machined group (P<.05). 3. There was no statistical significance in the correlation of surface roughness and wettability.

연구목적: 임플란트가 식립되어질 때 매식체는 조직액과 접촉하게 된다. 임플란트의 조직액 흡착은 표면처리에 따라 다양하게 나타난다. 이 때 임플란트 시편의 표면 거칠기와 젖음성과의 상관관계를 분석하고자 하였다. 연구재료 및 방법: 표면 거칠기와 젖음성의 상관관계를 측정하기 위해 네 종류의 임플란트 시편을 각각 5종류 만들었다. 각각의 그룹은 그룹 A: Machined Surface, 그룹 B: Anodized surface, 그룹 C: RBM (HA blasting) surface, 그룹 D: CMP (calcium methaphosphate) coating surface이다. 연구결과: 1. 표면의 거칠기는 RBM, CMP, Anodized, Machined 그룹 순서로 거칠었다. RBM과 CMP는 통계적으로 유의차가 없었다 (P<.05). 2. 젖음성은 Anodized, RBM, CMP, Machined 그룹 순서로 높았다. CMP와 Machined는 통계적으로 유의차가 없었다 (P<.05). 3. 표면 거칠기와 젖음성과의 상관관계는 없었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Branemark PI, Adell R, Breine U, Hansson BO, Lindstrom J, Ohlsson A. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. Experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1969;3:81-100 https://doi.org/10.3109/02844316909036699
  2. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Branemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10:387-416 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(81)80077-4
  3. Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U, Br°anemark PI, Jemt T. Long-term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:347-59
  4. Albrektsson T, Dahl E, Enbom L, Engevall S, Engquist B, Eriksson AR, Feldmann G, Freiberg N, Glantz PO, Kjellman O, et al. Osseointegrated oral implants. A Swedish multicenter study of 8139 consecutively inserted Nobelpharma implants. J Periodontol 1988;59:287-96 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1988.59.5.287
  5. Albrektsson T, Sennerby L. State of the art in oral implants. J Clin Periodontol 1991;18:474-81 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.1991.tb02319.x
  6. Eckert SE, Parein A, Myshin HL, Padilla JL. Validation of dental implant systems through a review of literature supplied by system manufacturers. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77:271-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70184-7
  7. Naert I, Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D, Darius P. A study of 589 consecutive implants supporting complete fixed prostheses. Part II: Prosthetic aspects. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:949-56 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90557-Q
  8. Cordioli G, Majzoub Z, Piattelli A, Scarano A. Removal torque and histomorphometric investigation of 4 different titanium surfaces: an experimental study in the rabbit tibia. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:668-74
  9. Gotfredsen K, Wennerberg A, Johansson C, Skovgaard LT, Hjorting-Hansen E. Anchorage of $TiO_2$-blasted, HA-coated, and machined implants: an experimental study with rabbits. J Biomed Mater Res 1995;29:1223-31 https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820291009
  10. Gotfredsen K, Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Anchorage of titanium implants with different surface characteristics: an experimental study in rabbits. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2000;2:120-8 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00002.x
  11. Esposito M, Hirsch JM, Lekholm U, Thomsen P. Failure patterns of four osseointegrated oral implant systems. J Mater Sci Mater Med 1997;8:843-7 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018593403126
  12. Sul YT, Johansson CB, Petronis S, Krozer A, Jeong Y, Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T. Characteristics of the surface oxides on turned and electrochemically oxidized pure titanium implants up to dielectric breakdown: the oxide thickness, micropore configurations, surface roughness, crystal structure and chemical composition. Biomaterials 2002;23:491-501 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(01)00131-4
  13. Buser D, Broggini N, Wieland M, Schenk RK, Denzer AJ, Cochran DL, Hoffmann B, Lussi A, Steinemann SG. Enhanced bone apposition to a chemically modified SLA titanium surface. J Dent Res 2004;83:529-33 https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910408300704
  14. Park JY, Gemmell CH, Davies JE. Platelet interactions with titanium: modulation of platelet activity by surface topography. Biomaterials 2001;22:2671-82 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(01)00009-6
  15. Kim JS, Shin SY, Ryu JJ. A study on the stability of 5 different surface treatment methods to dental implant using resonance frequency and histomorphometric analysis. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2005;43:78-94
  16. MacDonald DE, Deo N, Markovic B, Stranick M, Somasundaran P. Adsorption and dissolution behavior of human plasma fibronectin on thermally and chemically modified titanium dioxide particles. Biomaterials 2002;23:1269-79 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(01)00317-9
  17. Rupp F, Scheideler L, Rehbein D, Axmann D, Geis-Gerstorfer J. Roughness induced dynamic changes of wettability of acid etched titanium implant modifications. Biomaterials 2004;25:1429-38 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.08.015
  18. Listgarten MA, Buser D, Steinemann SG, Donath K, Lang NP, Weber HP. Light and transmission electron microscopy of the intact interfaces between non-submerged titaniumcoated epoxy resin implants and bone or gingiva. J Dent Res 1992;71:364-71 https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345920710020401
  19. Gotfredsen K, Nimb L, Hjorting-Hansen E, Jensen JS, Holmen A. Histomorphometric and removal torque analysis for $TiO_2$-blasted titanium implants. An experimental study on dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 1992;3:77-84 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030205.x
  20. 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 https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820250708
  21. Wilke HJ, Claes L, Steinmann S. The influence of various titanium surfaces on the interface shear strength between implants and bone. Clinical implant Materials. Advances in Biomaterials. Elsevier Science Publishers B. V. Amsterdam 1990;9:309-14
  22. Hanson S. On the role of surface roughness for load bearing bone implants M. SC. Thesis Centre for Biomechanics. Calmers University of Goteborg. Goteborg 1991