Cargando…

Bone Response to Conventional Titanium Implants and New Zirconia Implants Produced by Additive Manufacturing

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the in vivo bone response to an additively manufactured zirconia surface compared to osseointegration into titanium (Ti) surfaces. Scanning electron microscopy, confocal laser scanning microscopy, and electron spectroscopy for chemical analysis were perfo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Jin-Cheol, Yeo, In-Sung Luke
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8401228/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34442927
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14164405
_version_ 1783745501474062336
author Kim, Jin-Cheol
Yeo, In-Sung Luke
author_facet Kim, Jin-Cheol
Yeo, In-Sung Luke
author_sort Kim, Jin-Cheol
collection PubMed
description The aim of the present study was to evaluate the in vivo bone response to an additively manufactured zirconia surface compared to osseointegration into titanium (Ti) surfaces. Scanning electron microscopy, confocal laser scanning microscopy, and electron spectroscopy for chemical analysis were performed to assess the surface characteristics of implant specimens. For the in vivo evaluation, eight Ti implants and eight 3D-printed zirconia implants were used. The surface of four Ti implants was sandblasted, large-grit, and acid-etched (Ti-SLA group), while those of the other four Ti implants were left untreated (Ti-turned group). The zirconia implants had no further surface modification. Implants were placed into the tibiae of four rabbits; two received the Ti-SLA and zirconia implants and the other two received Ti-turned and zirconia implants. The experimental animals were sacrificed after four weeks of surgery, and the undecalcified microscopic slides were prepared. The bone–implant interface was analyzed by histomorphometry to evaluate the bone response. The degree of surface roughness showed that Ti-SLA was the highest, followed by zirconia and Ti-turned surfaces. The 3D-printed zirconia surface showed similar bone-to-implant contact to the Ti-turned surface, and Ti-SLA had the most bone-to-implant contact. The additively manufactured zirconia implant surface is biocompatible with respect to osseointegration compared to the commercially pure Ti surface.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8401228
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84012282021-08-29 Bone Response to Conventional Titanium Implants and New Zirconia Implants Produced by Additive Manufacturing Kim, Jin-Cheol Yeo, In-Sung Luke Materials (Basel) Article The aim of the present study was to evaluate the in vivo bone response to an additively manufactured zirconia surface compared to osseointegration into titanium (Ti) surfaces. Scanning electron microscopy, confocal laser scanning microscopy, and electron spectroscopy for chemical analysis were performed to assess the surface characteristics of implant specimens. For the in vivo evaluation, eight Ti implants and eight 3D-printed zirconia implants were used. The surface of four Ti implants was sandblasted, large-grit, and acid-etched (Ti-SLA group), while those of the other four Ti implants were left untreated (Ti-turned group). The zirconia implants had no further surface modification. Implants were placed into the tibiae of four rabbits; two received the Ti-SLA and zirconia implants and the other two received Ti-turned and zirconia implants. The experimental animals were sacrificed after four weeks of surgery, and the undecalcified microscopic slides were prepared. The bone–implant interface was analyzed by histomorphometry to evaluate the bone response. The degree of surface roughness showed that Ti-SLA was the highest, followed by zirconia and Ti-turned surfaces. The 3D-printed zirconia surface showed similar bone-to-implant contact to the Ti-turned surface, and Ti-SLA had the most bone-to-implant contact. The additively manufactured zirconia implant surface is biocompatible with respect to osseointegration compared to the commercially pure Ti surface. MDPI 2021-08-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8401228/ /pubmed/34442927 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14164405 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Kim, Jin-Cheol
Yeo, In-Sung Luke
Bone Response to Conventional Titanium Implants and New Zirconia Implants Produced by Additive Manufacturing
title Bone Response to Conventional Titanium Implants and New Zirconia Implants Produced by Additive Manufacturing
title_full Bone Response to Conventional Titanium Implants and New Zirconia Implants Produced by Additive Manufacturing
title_fullStr Bone Response to Conventional Titanium Implants and New Zirconia Implants Produced by Additive Manufacturing
title_full_unstemmed Bone Response to Conventional Titanium Implants and New Zirconia Implants Produced by Additive Manufacturing
title_short Bone Response to Conventional Titanium Implants and New Zirconia Implants Produced by Additive Manufacturing
title_sort bone response to conventional titanium implants and new zirconia implants produced by additive manufacturing
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8401228/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34442927
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14164405
work_keys_str_mv AT kimjincheol boneresponsetoconventionaltitaniumimplantsandnewzirconiaimplantsproducedbyadditivemanufacturing
AT yeoinsungluke boneresponsetoconventionaltitaniumimplantsandnewzirconiaimplantsproducedbyadditivemanufacturing