Three-Dimensional Topographic and Metrologic Evaluation of Dental Implants by Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy

Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 176-183

  Al Nawas, Bila ^a   Götz, Hermann ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER MAINZ   (Germany)

Author keywords

Confocal microscopy; Dental implant; Scanning electron microscopy; Surface analysis

Indexed keywords

HYDROXYAPATITE; TITANIUM;

ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CONFOCAL LASER MICROSCOPY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; EVALUATION; SURFACE PROPERTY; TOOTH IMPLANTATION; TOPOGRAPHY;

EID: 0345491483     PISSN: 15230899     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2003.tb00200.x     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U, et al. Long-term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990; 5:347-359.
2. Buser D, Mericske SR, Bernard JP, et al. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997; 8:161-172.
3. Grötz KA, Wahlmann UW, Krummenauer F, et al. Prognose und Prognosefaktoren enossaler Implantate im bestrahlten Kiefer. Mund Kiefer Gesichts. Chir 1999; 3(Suppl 1):117-124.
4. Lazzara RJ, Porter SS, Testori T, et al. A prospective multi-center study evaluating loading of Osseotite implants two months after placement: one-year results. J Esthet Dent 1998; 10:280-289.
5. Piattelli A, Corigliano M, Scarano A, et al. Immediate loading of titanium plasma-sprayed implants: an histologic analysis in monkeys. J Periodontol 1998; 69:321-327.
6. Kieswetter K, Schwartz Z, Dean DD, Boyan BD. The role of implant surface characteristics in the healing of bone. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 1996; 7:329-345.
7. Ong JL, Carnes DL, Cardenas HL, Cavin R. Surface roughness of titanium on bone morphogenetic protein-2 treated osteoblast cells in vitro. Implant Dent 1997; 6(1):19-24.
8. Schwartz Z, Kieswetter K, Dean DD, Boyan BD. Underlying mechanisms at the bone-surface interface during regeneration. J Periodont Res 1997;32(1 Pt 2):166-171.
9. Pebe P, Barbot R, Trinidad J, et al. Countertorque testing and histomorphometric analysis of various implant surfaces in canines: a pilot study. Implant Dent 1997; 6:259-265.
10. Wennerberg A, Ektessabi A, Albrektsson T, et al. A 1-year follow-up of implants of differing surface roughness placed in rabbit bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997; 12:486-494.
11. Wong M, Eulenberger J, Schenk R, Hunziker E. Effect of surface topology on the osseointegration of implant materials in trabecular bone. J Biomed Mater Res 1995; 29:1567-1575.
12. Suzuki K, Aoki K, Ohya K. Effects of surface roughness of titanium implants on bone remodeling activity of femur in rabbits. Bone 1997; 21:507-514.
13. Buser D, Nydegger T, Hirt HP, et al. Removal torque values of titanium implants in the maxilla of miniature pigs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998; 13:611-619.
14. Al-Nawas B, Grötz KA, Götz H, et al. Validation of 3D surface characterising methods, scanning electron microscopy and confocal laser scanning microscopy, for surface roughness analysis. Scanning 2001; 23:227-231.
15. Kofod N, Hansen HN, De Chiffre L, Gotfredsen K. Surface characterisation of oral implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999; 10:172.
16. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T. Suggested guidelines for the topographic evaluation of implant surfaces. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000; 15:331-344.
17. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T, Andersson B. Design and surface characteristics of 13 commercially available oral implant systems. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993; 8:622-633.
18. Abrahamsson I, Zitzmann NU, Berglundh T, et al. Bone and soft tissue integration to titanium implants with different surface topography: an experimental study in the dog. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001; 16:323-332.
19. Cochran DL, Nummikoski PV, Higginbottom FL, et al. Evaluation of an endosseus titanium implant with a sandblasted and acid etched surface in canine mandible: radiographic results. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996; 7:240-252.
20. Wennerberg A, Hallgren C, Johansson C, Danelli S. A histomorphometric evaluation of screw-shaped implants each prepared with two surface roughnesses. Clin Oral Implants Res 1998; 9:11-19.
21. Wieland M, Textor M, Spencer ND, Brunette DM. Wavelength-dependent roughness: a quantitative approach to characterizing the topography of rough titanium surfaces. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001; 16:163-181.
22. Sacerdotti F, Griffiths BJ, Benati F, Butler C. Mathematical modelling of three-dimensional surface topography in autobody manufacture - the state of the art. Institution of Mechanical Engineers 2000; 214:811-819.
23. Stout KJ, Davis EJ, Sullivan PJ, et al. The development of methods for the characterization of roughness in three dimensions. Birmingham, England: University of Birmingham, EC Brusselles, EN of Commission of the European Communities, 1992.
24. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T, Ulrich H, Krol JJ. An optical three-dimensional technique for topographical descriptions of surgical implants. J Biomed Eng 1992; 14:412-418.