Oral implant surfaces: Part 2--review focusing on clinical knowledge of different surfaces.
OBJECTIVE
This article reviews clinical knowledge of selected oral implant surfaces.


METHODS
The surfaces most commonly used in clinical practice, marketed by the five largest oral implant companies, are identified; their clinical documentation was scrutinized following a strict protocol. Experimental knowledge of the surfaces is briefly summarized. Retrospective, prospective, and comparative clinical studies were analyzed separately, as were studies of implants in conjunction with bone grafts.


RESULTS
TiUnite anodized surfaces are clinically documented in 1- to 2-year follow-up studies at best, with failures at about 3%. Sandblasted and acid-etched SLA surfaces are documented with good clinical results for up to 3 years. Osseotite dual acid-etched implants are documented with good clinical results for up to 5 years. Frialit-2 sandblasted and etched implants are positively documented for about 3 years in one study only. The Tioblast implant is the only design documented for survival over 10 years of follow-up and success over 7 years of follow-up.


CONCLUSIONS
Generally, oral implants are introduced clinically without adequate clinical documentation. Implant companies initiate clinical documentation after product launch. The standards of clinical reporting have improved over the years. Proper long-term reports have been published for only one surface, Tioblast.
Albrektsson
Tomas
T
Department of Biomaterials/Handicap Research, Institute for Surgical Sciences, Göteborg University, Sweden. tomas.albrektsson@biomaterials.gu.se
Wennerberg
Ann
A
D016025:Bone Transplantation; D003758:Dental Implantation, Endosseous; D015921:Dental Implants; D017267:Dental Prosthesis Design; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D016348:Osseointegration; D011446:Prospective Studies; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013499:Surface Properties
D015921:Dental Implants