Identification card and codification of the chemical and morphological characteristics of 62 dental implant surfaces. Part 1: description of the Implant Surface Identification Standard (ISIS) codification system

Dental implants are commonly used in dental therapeutics, but dental practitioners only have limited information about the characteristics of the implant materials they take the responsibility to place in their patients. Manufacturers, scientists and administrations are also lacking of a consensual and clear method and terminology to characterize and control implant surfaces. The objective of this series of 5 articles is to define and describe the Implant Surface Identification Standard (ISIS) system for the chemical and morphological characterization of dental implant surfaces, and to use it to characterize and establish the respective Identification (ID) Card and code of 62 implant surfaces available on the market. In this first part, the current version of the ISIS system and methodology is described and discussed. Using standardized protocols of analysis and terminology, each osseointegrated implant surface can be defined using a standardized characterization code. First the ISIS codification system describes the surface chemical composition: the core material (titanium grades, zirconia, hydroxy-apatite) and the chemical modification (impregnation, coating, pollution). The system then defines the surface morphology (topography, structures) at the microscale (microroughness, micropores, microparticles) and nanoscale (nanoroughness, nanopatterning, nanotubes, nanoparticles, nanosmooth), and its global architecture (homogeneity, cracks, fractal architecture). This standardized characterization, classification and codification system allows to clarify the identity of each surface and to easily sort out their differences, to control implant production and to facilitate communication. Therefore it

[1]  Lyndon F Cooper,et al.  The effects of implant surface nanoscale features on osteoblast-specific gene expression. , 2009, Biomaterials.

[2]  Paulo G Coelho,et al.  Classification of osseointegrated implant surfaces: materials, chemistry and topography. , 2010, Trends in biotechnology.

[3]  T. Albrektsson,et al.  Which surface properties enhance bone response to implants? Comparison of oxidized magnesium, TiUnite, and Osseotite implant surfaces. , 2006, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[4]  T Albrektsson,et al.  Suggested guidelines for the topographic evaluation of implant surfaces. , 2000, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[5]  T. Albrektsson,et al.  Micrometric characterization of the implant surfaces from the five largest companies in Brazil, the second largest worldwide implant market. , 2013, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[6]  J. Bernard,et al.  Identification card and codification of the chemical and morphological characteristics of 14 dental implant surfaces. , 2011, The Journal of oral implantology.

[7]  Ignace Naert,et al.  Quality of dental implants. , 2003, International dental journal.

[8]  J. Shibli,et al.  In dental implant surfaces, NanoWar has begun… but NanoQuest is still at stake! , 2013 .

[9]  T. Albrektsson,et al.  The peri-implantitis: implant surfaces, microstructure, and physicochemical aspects. , 2012, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[10]  T. Albrektsson,et al.  The roles of surface chemistry and topography in the strength and rate of osseointegration of titanium implants in bone. , 2009, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[11]  Lyndon F Cooper,et al.  Advancing dental implant surface technology--from micron- to nanotopography. , 2008, Biomaterials.

[12]  David M. Dohan Ehrenfest,et al.  Fractal patterns applied to implant surface: definitions and perspectives. , 2011 .

[13]  C. Cassinelli,et al.  Effect of titanium implant surface nanoroughness and calcium phosphate low impregnation on bone cell activity in vitro. , 2010, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[14]  T. Albrektsson,et al.  XPS, AES and SEM analysis of recent dental implants. , 2009, Acta biomaterialia.

[15]  J. Granjeiro,et al.  Basic research methods and current trends of dental implant surfaces. , 2009, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials.

[16]  D. M. Dohan Ehrenfest Fractal patterns applied to implant surface: definitions and perspectives. , 2011, The Journal of oral implantology.

[17]  R. Oreffo,et al.  Osteoprogenitor response to semi-ordered and random nanotopographies. , 2006, Biomaterials.

[18]  F. Rosei,et al.  Nanoscale oxidative patterning of metallic surfaces to modulate cell activity and fate. , 2009, Nano letters.

[19]  M. Ferrari,et al.  Modulating cellular adhesion through nanotopography. , 2010, Biomaterials.