Biomechanical, histological, and ultrastructural analyses of laser micro- and nano-structured titanium alloy implants: a study in rabbit.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical properties and ultrastructure of the bone response of partly laser-modified Ti6Al4V implants compared with turned, machined implants after 8 weeks in rabbit. The surface analyses performed with interference microscopy and electron microscopy showed increased surface topography with micro- and nano-sized surface features as well as increased oxide thickness of the modified surface. The biomechanical testing demonstrated a 270% increase in torque value for the surface modified implants compared with the control implants. Histological evaluation of ground sections of specimens subjected to biomechanical testing revealed ongoing bone formation and remodeling. A histological feature exclusively observed at the laser-modified surface was the presence of fracture in the mineralized bone rather than at the interface between the bone and implant. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) was performed on Focused Ion Beam (FIB) prepared samples of the intact bone-implant interface, demonstrating a direct contact between nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite and the oxide of the laser-modified implant surface. In conclusion, laser-modified titanium alloy implants have significantly stronger bone anchorage compared with machined implants and show no adverse tissue reactions.

[1]  P. Coulthard,et al.  The role of implant surface modifications, shape and material on the success of osseointegrated dental implants. A Cochrane systematic review. , 2005, The European journal of prosthodontics and restorative dentistry.

[2]  H. Kido,et al.  Ultrastructure of the interface between titanium and surrounding tissue in rat tibiae--a comparison study on titanium-coated and -uncoated plastic implants. , 2007, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[3]  K. Donath,et al.  A method for the study of undecalcified bones and teeth with attached soft tissues. The sawing and grinding technique , 1982 .

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

[5]  T. Albrektsson,et al.  A 1-year follow-up of implants of differing surface roughness placed in rabbit bone. , 1997, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[6]  Carina B. Johansson,et al.  A quantitative comparison of the cell response to commercially pure titanium and Ti-6Al-4V implants in the abdominal wall of rats , 1992 .

[7]  H. Yoshikawa,et al.  Macro-structural effect of metal surfaces treated using computer-assisted yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser scanning on bone-implant fixation. , 2005, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[8]  T Albrektsson,et al.  Ultrastructural differences of the interface zone between bone and Ti 6Al 4V or commercially pure titanium. , 1989, Journal of biomedical engineering.

[9]  C. Ju,et al.  A comparison of the fatigue behavior of cast Ti-7.5Mo with c.p. titanium, Ti-6Al-4V and Ti-13Nb-13Zr alloys. , 2005, Biomaterials.

[10]  K. Donath,et al.  A method for the study of undecalcified bones and teeth with attached soft tissues. The Säge-Schliff (sawing and grinding) technique. , 1982, Journal of oral pathology.

[11]  M. Mesquita,et al.  Surface roughness and fatigue performance of commercially pure titanium and Ti-6Al-4V alloy after different polishing protocols. , 2005, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[12]  B. Kasemo,et al.  Bone response to surface modified titanium implants: studies on electropolished implants with different oxide thicknesses and morphology. , 1994, Biomaterials.

[13]  G Schultes,et al.  Scanning electron microscopical analysis of laser-treated titanium implant surfaces--a comparative study. , 2000, Biomaterials.

[14]  B. Kasemo,et al.  Microstructure and morphology of surface oxide films on Ti–6A1–4V , 1990 .

[15]  T. Hothorn,et al.  Bone-implant interface shear modulus and ultimate stress in a transcortical rabbit model of open-pore Ti6Al4V implants. , 2006, Journal of biomechanics.

[16]  R. Brånemark,et al.  Technique for preparation and characterization in cross-section of oral titanium implant surfaces using focused ion beam and transmission electron microscopy. , 2008, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[17]  H. Hansson,et al.  Electron microscopic analysis of the bone-titanium interface. , 1983, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica.

[18]  B. Kasemo,et al.  Preparation and surface spectroscopic characterization of oxide films on Ti6Al4V , 1989 .

[19]  Julie Gold,et al.  An in vivo study of bone response to implants topographically modified by laser micromachining. , 2003, Biomaterials.

[20]  R. Listrom,et al.  Interface between titanium 6,4 alloy implants and bone. , 1987, International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

[21]  T Albrektsson,et al.  A quantitative comparison of machined commercially pure titanium and titanium-aluminum-vanadium implants in rabbit bone. , 1998, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[22]  Raghuvir Singh,et al.  Laser Surface Modification of Ti—6Al—4V: Wear and Corrosion Characterization in Simulated Biofluid , 2006, Journal of biomaterials applications.

[23]  Sung-Am Cho,et al.  A removal torque of the laser-treated titanium implants in rabbit tibia. , 2003, Biomaterials.

[24]  H. Götz,et al.  Three-dimensional topographic and metrologic evaluation of dental implants by confocal laser scanning microscopy. , 2003, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[25]  L Sennerby,et al.  A removal torque and histomorphometric study of bone tissue reactions to commercially pure titanium and Vitallium implants. , 1991, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[26]  T Albrektsson,et al.  A removal torque and histomorphometric study of commercially pure niobium and titanium implants in rabbit bone. , 1991, Clinical oral implants research.