What is This? Downloaded from jdr.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 23, 2013 For personal use only. No other uses without permission. International and American Associations for Dental ResearchRESEARCH REPORTS

Increased surface roughness of dental implants has demonstrated greater bone apposition; however, the effect of modifying surface chemistry remains unknown. In the present study, we evaluated bone apposition to a modified sandblasted/acid-etched (modSLA) titanium surface, as compared with a standard SLA surface, during early stages of bone regeneration. Experimental implants were placed in miniature pigs, creating 2 circular bone defects. Test and control implants had the same topography, but differed in surface chemistry. We created the test surface by submerging the implant in an isotonic NaCl solution following acid-etching to avoid contamination with molecules from the atmosphere. Test implants demonstrated a significantly greater mean percentage of bone-implant contact as compared with controls at 2 (49.30 vs. 29.42%; p = 0.017) and 4 wks (81.91 vs. 66.57%; p = 0.011) of healing. At 8 wks, similar results were observed. It is concluded that the modSLA surface promoted enhanced bone apposition during early stages of bone regeneration.

[1]  A. Holmen,et al.  Histomorphometric and removal torque analysis for TiO2-blasted titanium implants. An experimental study on dogs. , 1992, Clinical oral implants research.

[2]  A. Lussi,et al.  Early loading of non-submerged titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface. 5-year results of a prospective study in partially edentulous patients. , 2003, Clinical oral implants research.

[3]  Uwe Thiele,et al.  Wetting of textured surfaces , 2002 .

[4]  T. Albrektsson,et al.  A histomorphometric and removal torque study of screw-shaped titanium implants with three different surface topographies. , 1995, Clinical oral implants research.

[5]  M. Textor,et al.  Characterization of Titanium Surfaces , 2001 .

[6]  D Buser,et al.  Bone response to unloaded and loaded titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a histometric study in the canine mandible. , 1998, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[7]  H. Hansson,et al.  Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. , 1981, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica.

[8]  Ann Wennerberg,et al.  A histomorghometric study of screw‐shaped and removal torque titanium implants with three different surface topographies , 1995 .

[9]  M. Textor,et al.  Comparative investigation of the surface properties of commercial titanium dental implants. Part I: chemical composition , 2002, Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine.

[10]  Hans-Joachim Wilke,et al.  The influence of various titanium surfaces on the interface shear strength between implants and bone , 1991 .

[11]  B D Boyan,et al.  Effect of titanium surface roughness on proliferation, differentiation, and protein synthesis of human osteoblast-like cells (MG63). , 1995, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[12]  D. Buser.  Titanium for Dental Applications (II): Implants with Roughened Surfaces , 2001 .

[13]  Jean-Pierre Bernard,et al.  The use of reduced healing times on ITI implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) surface: early results from clinical trials on ITI SLA implants. , 2002, Clinical oral implants research.

[14]  L. Nolte,et al.  Interface shear strength of titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a biomechanical study in the maxilla of miniature pigs. , 1999, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[15]  Rainer Brodmann,et al.  Quality assurance of HARMS and MOEMS surface structures using confocal white light microscopy , 2001, SPIE Optics + Photonics.

[16]  Urs C Belser,et al.  Early loading of nonsubmerged titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) surface: 3-year results of a prospective study in partially edentulous patients. , 2003, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[17]  S. Ferguson,et al.  Biomechanical comparison of the sandblasted and acid-etched and the machined and acid-etched titanium surface for dental implants. , 2002, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[18]  S. Steinemann.  Titanium--the material of choice? , 1998, Periodontology 2000.

[19]  D Buser,et al.  Influence of surface characteristics on bone integration of titanium implants. A histomorphometric study in miniature pigs. , 1991, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[20]  S. Tosatti,et al.  Properties and Biological Significance of Natural Oxide Films on Titanium and Its Alloys , 2001 .

[21]  J. Lemons,et al.  Surface energy characterization of unalloyed titanium implants. , 1994, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[22]  D. Cagna,et al.  Early loading of sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) implants: a prospective split-mouth comparative study , 2002 .