A Comparison Study of the Osseointegration of Zirconia and Titanium Dental Implants. A Biomechanical Evaluation in the Maxilla of Pigs

Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 297-305

  Gahlert, Michael ^a   Röhling, Stefan ^b   Wieland, Marco ^c   Eichhorn, Stefan ^b   Küchenhoff, Helmut ^d   Kniha, Heinz ^a  

^a Private Dental Clinic   (Germany)

^b TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^c Institut Straumann   (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Biomechanical testing; Dental implants; Pigs; Titanium; Zirconia

Indexed keywords

BIOMATERIAL; TITANIUM; ZIRCONIUM; ZIRCONIUM OXIDE;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BONE REGENERATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DENTAL ACID ETCHING; MAXILLA; SURFACE PROPERTY; SWINE; TOOTH IMPLANTATION; TOOTH PROSTHESIS; TORQUE;

ACID ETCHING, DENTAL; ANIMALS; COATED MATERIALS, BIOCOMPATIBLE; DENTAL IMPLANTATION, ENDOSSEOUS; DENTAL IMPLANTS; DENTAL PORCELAIN; DENTAL PROSTHESIS DESIGN; MAXILLA; OSSEOINTEGRATION; SURFACE PROPERTIES; SUS SCROFA; TITANIUM; TORQUE; ZIRCONIUM;

EID: 78349236195     PISSN: 15230899     EISSN: 17088208     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00168.x     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Albrektsson T, Branemark PI, Hansson HA, Lindstrom J. Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. Acta Orthop Scand 1981; 52:155-170.
2. Steinemann SG. Titanium - the material of choice? Periodontol 2000 1998; 17:7-21.
3. Kohal RJ, Att W, Bächle M, Butz F. Ceramic abutments and ceramic oral implants. an update. Periodontol 2000 2008; 47:224-243.
4. Glauser R, Sailer I, Wohlwend A, Studer S, Schibli M, Schärer P. Experimental zirconia abutments for implant-supported single-tooth restorations in esthetically demanding regions: 4-year results of a prospective clinical study. Int J Prosthodont 2004; 17:285-290.
5. Marinello CP, Meyenberg KH, Zitzmann N, Lüthy H, Soom U, Imoberdorf M. Single-tooth replacement: some clinical aspects. J Esthet Dent 1997; 9:169-178.
6. Gahlert M, Gudehus T, Eichhorn S, Steinhauser E, Kniha H, Erhardt W. Biomechanical and histomorphometric comparison between zirconia implants with varying surface textures and a titanium implant in the maxilla of miniature pigs. Clin Oral Implant Res 2007; 18:662-668.
7. Sennerby L, Dasmah A, Larsson B, Iverhed M. Bone tissue responses to surface-modified zirconia implants: a histomorphometric and removal torque study in the rabbit. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005; 7:13-21.
8. Kohal RJ, Weng D, Bächle M, Strub JR. Loaded custom-made zirconia and titanium implants show similar osseointegration: an animal experiment. J Periodontol 2004; 75:1262-1268.
9. Volz U, Blaschke C. Metal-free reconstruction with zirconia implants and zirconia crowns. Quintessence J Dent Technol 2004; 4:324-330.
10. Akagawa Y, Hosokawa R, Sato Y, Kamayama K. Comparison between freestanding and tooth-connected partially stabilized zirconia implants after two years' function in monkeys: a clinical and histologic study. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 80:551-558.
11. Minamizato T. Slip-cast zirconia dental roots with tunnels drilled by laser process. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 63:677-684.
12. Ichikawa Y. Akagawa Y, Nikai H, Tsuru H. Tissue compatibility and stability of a new zirconia ceramic in vivo. J Prosthet Dent 1992; 68:322-326.
13. Josset Y, Oum'Hamed Z, Zarrinpour A, Lorenzato M, Adnet J, Laurent-Maquin D. In vitro reactions of human osteoblasts in culture with zirconia and alumina ceramics. J Biomed Mater Res 1999; 47:481-493.
14. Schultze-Mosgau S, Schliephake H, Radespiel-Tröger M, Neukam FW. Osseointegration of endodontic endosseous cones: zirconium oxide vs titanium. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000; 89:91-98.
15. Buser D, Schenk RK, Steinemann S, Fiorellini JP, Fox CH, Stich H. Influence of surface characteristics on bone integration of titanium implants. A histometric study in miniature pigs. J Biomed Mater Res 1991; 25:889-902.
16. Carlsson L, Rostlund T, Albrektsson B, Albrektsson T. Removal torques for polished and rough titanium implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988; 3:21-24.
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. Cochran DL, Numikoski PV, Higgenbottom FL, Hermann JS, Makins SR, Buser D. Evaluation of an endosseous titanium implant with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface in the canine mandible: radiographic results. Clin Oral Impl Res 1996; 7:240-252.
19. 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.
20. R Development Core Team 2007. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. (Accessed March 4, 2009)
21. Li D, Ferguson SJ, Beutler T et al. Biomechanical comparison of the sandblasted and acid-etched and the machined and acid-etched titanium surface for dental implants. J Biomed Mater Res 2002; 60:325-332.
22. Buser D, Nydegger T, Hirt HP, Cochran DL, Nolte LP. Removal torque values of titanium implants in the maxilla of miniature pigs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998; 13:611-619.