Materials characteristics of uncoated/ceramic-coated implant materials.
In this paper, the biocompatibility of dental implant materials is discussed in the context of both the mechanical characteristics of the materials and the type of surface presented to the surrounding tissues. The proper functioning of the implant depends on whether it possesses the strength necessary to withstand loading within the expected range, with other properties such as elongation being of importance in some instances. A suitable modulus of elasticity may be of major importance in situations when optimum load transmission from the implant into the surrounding bone is key to the successful functioning of the device. Dental implants present a wide range of surfaces to the surrounding tissues based on surface composition, texture, charge energy, and cleanliness (sterility). Metallic implants are characterized by protective oxide layers, but ion release is still common with these materials, and is a function of passivation state, composition, and corrosion potential. An effective surface treatment for titanium appears to be passivation or anodization in a suitable solution prior to implantation. Inert ceramic surfaces exhibit minimal ion release, but are similar to metals in that they do not form a high energy bond to the surrounding bone. Some of the newly developed dental implant alloys such as titanium alloys, which contain zirconium and niobium, and high-strength ceramics such as zirconia may offer some advantages (such as lower modulus of elasticity) over the conventional materials. Calcium phosphate ceramic coatings are commonly used to convert metallic surfaces into a more bioactive state and typically cause faster bone apposition. There is a wide range of ceramic coatings containing calcium and phosphorus, with the primary difference in many of these materials being in the rate of ion release. Although their long-term success rate is unknown, the calcium phosphate surfaces seem to have a higher potential for attachment of osteoinductive agents than do uncoated titanium and other more inert implant materials.
Lacefield
W R
WR
University of Alabama School of Dentistry, Biomaterials Department, Box 49, Birmingham, Alabama 35294, USA.
D001672:Biocompatible Materials / Q000737:chemistry*; D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D002130:Calcium Phosphates / Q000737:chemistry; D002244:Carbon / Q000737:chemistry; D002516:Ceramics / Q000737:chemistry; D020099:Coated Materials, Biocompatible / Q000737:chemistry*; D003722:Dental Alloys / Q000737:chemistry; D003758:Dental Implantation, Endosseous; D015921:Dental Implants; D003764:Dental Materials / Q000737:chemistry*; D004548:Elasticity; D006801:Humans; D016348:Osseointegration / Q000502:physiology; D013314:Stress, Mechanical; D013499:Surface Properties; D014025:Titanium / Q000737:chemistry
D001672:Biocompatible Materials; D002130:Calcium Phosphates; D020099:Coated Materials, Biocompatible; D003722:Dental Alloys; D015921:Dental Implants; D003764:Dental Materials; C485828:alpha-tricalcium phosphate; C485830:tetracalcium phosphate; C485838:calcium phosphate, monobasic, anhydrous; D002244:Carbon; C020243:calcium phosphate; D014025:Titanium; C485829:calcium phosphate, dibasic, anhydrous