Abstract
Shape, surface composition and topography are key factors to achieve post surgery and long-term mechanical stability of endosseous dental titanium implants and to enhance implant osteointegration [1]. Among implant materials, titanium is particularly suitable for orthopaedic and endosseous dental implants on account of its good mechanical properties and biocompatibility [2].
Recent research has studied the morphology of implant surfaces [3,4,5] demonstrating that rough surfaces influence the osteointegration rate which is shorter when a surface is roughened by a sand-blasting technique.
Our in vitro research shows that sand-blasted surfaces positively influence osteoblast metabolic activity by modifying phenotype, surface adhesion levels and proliferation rate [6]. These findings were correlated with in vivo experiments on sheep femur and tibia with implants bearing the same surface characteristics. The implants and surrounding tissue were removed 2, 3 and 12 weeks later and processed for light, electron (scanning and transmission) microscopy study.
A few days after surgery, osteogenic activity was markedly enhanced in the sand-blasted implants which presented more new tissue closely adhering to the implant surface. Three months later there were no major differences in the three samples examined and all showed perfect osteointegration.
Our results suggest that the shorter osteointegration rate obtained with sand-blasted implant surfaces is not only the result of the increased surface area in contact with newly formed bone tissue, but is also correlated to the enhanced osteoblast osteogenesis induced by the concave surfaces geometric design.
The abstracts were prepared by Ms Grazia Gliozzi. Correspondence should be addressed to her at the Italian Orthopaedic Research Society, Laboratory for Pathophysiology, Instituti Ortopedici Rizzoli, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
[1] Ungersbock A., Pohler O.E.M. and Perren S.M. Biomaterials1996; 17:797–806 Google Scholar
[2] Browne M., Gregson PJ., Biomaterials2000; 21:385–92 Google Scholar
[3] Buser D. et al., J Biomed Mater Res.1999 May; 45(2):75–83 Google Scholar
[4] Martini D. et al., Biomaterials2003; 24:1309–16 Google Scholar
[5] Fini M. et al., Biomaterials2003; 24:3183–92 Google Scholar
[6] Guizzardi S. et al., J Periodontology2004; 75:257–66 Google Scholar
