Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Histomorphometric and histologic evaluation of titanium–zirconium (aTiZr) implants with anodized surfaces

  • Biomaterials Synthesis and Characterization
  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The choice of implant surface has a significant influence on osseointegration. Modification of TiZr surface by anodization is reported to have the potential to modulate the osteoblast cell behaviour favouring more rapid bone formation. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of anodizing the surface of TiZr discs with respect to osseointegration after four weeks implantation in sheep femurs. Titanium (Ti) and TiZr discs were anodized in an electrolyte containing dl-α-glycerophosphate and calcium acetate at 300 V. The surface characteristics were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy, electron dispersive spectroscopy, atomic force microscopy and goniometry. Forty implant discs with thickness of 1.5 and 10 mm diameter (10 of each-titanium, titanium–zirconium, anodized titanium and anodized titanium–zirconium) were placed in the femoral condyles of 10 sheep. Histomorphometric and histologic analysis were performed 4 weeks after implantation. The anodized implants displayed hydrophilic, porous, nano-to-micrometer scale roughened surfaces. Energy dispersive spectroscopy analysis revealed calcium and phosphorous incorporation into the surface of both titanium and titanium–zirconium after anodization. Histologically there was new bone apposition on all implanted discs, slightly more pronounced on anodised discs. The percentage bone-to-implant contact measurements of anodized implants were higher than machined/unmodified implants but there was no significant difference between the two groups with anodized surfaces (P > 0.05, n = 10). The present histomorphometric and histological findings confirm that surface modification of titanium–zirconium by anodization is similar to anodised titanium enhances early osseointegration compared to machined implant surfaces.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sharma A, McQuillan AJ, Sharma LA, Waddell JN, Shibata Y, Duncan WJ. Spark anodization of titanium–zirconium alloy: surface characterization and bioactivity assessment. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2015;26(8):1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Duncan W, Lee M, Dovban A, Hendra N, Ershadi S, Rumende H. Anodization increases early integration of Osstem implants in sheep femurs. Ann R Australas Coll Dent Surg. 2008;19:152–6.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Park IS, Lee MH. Effects of anodic spark oxidation by pulse power on titanium substrates. Surf Interface Anal. 2011;43(7):1030–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Park KH, Heo SJ, Koak JY, Kim SK, Lee JB, Kim SH, et al. Osseointegration of anodized titanium implants under different current voltages: a rabbit study. J Oral Rehabil. 2007;34(7):517–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Shibata Y, Kawai H, Yamamoto H, Igarashi T, Miyazaki T. Antibacterial titanium plate anodized by being discharged in NaCl solution exhibits cell compatibility. J Dent Res. 2004;83(2):115–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Suh JY, Jang BC, Zhu X, Ong JL, Kim K. Effect of hydrothermally treated anodic oxide films on osteoblast attachment and proliferation. Biomaterials. 2003;24(2):347–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sul Y-T, Johansson C, Byon E, Albrektsson T. The bone response of oxidized bioactive and non-bioactive titanium implants. Biomaterials. 2005;26(33):6720–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Park IS, Lee MH, Bae TS, Seol KW. Effects of anodic oxidation parameters on a modified titanium surface. J Biomed Mater Res B. 2008;84(2):422–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Sul Y-T. The significance of the surface properties of oxidized titanium to the bone response: special emphasis on potential biochemical bonding of oxidized titanium implant. Biomaterials. 2003;24(22):3893–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhu X, Chen J, Scheideler L, Reichl R, Geis-Gerstorfer J. Effects of topography and composition of titanium surface oxides on osteoblast responses. Biomaterials. 2004;25(18):4087–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhu X, Kim K-H, Jeong Y. Anodic oxide films containing Ca and P of titanium biomaterial. Biomaterials. 2001;22(16):2199–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Le Guéhennec L, Soueidan A, Layrolle P, Amouriq Y. Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration. Dent Mater. 2007;23(7):844–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gottlow J, Barkarmo S, Sennerby L. An experimental comparison of two different clinically used implant designs and surfaces. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14(Suppl 1):e204–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sul YT, Johansson C, Albrektsson T. Which surface properties enhance bone response to implants? Comparison of oxidized magnesium, TiUnite, and Osseotite implant surfaces. Int J Prosthodont. 2006;19(4):319–28.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kobayashi E, Matsumoto S, Doi H, Yoneyama T, Hamanaka H. Mechanical properties of the binary titanium-zirconium alloys and their potential for biomedical materials. J Biomed Mater Res. 1995;8(29):943–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gottlow J, Dard M, Kjellson F, Obrecht M, Sennerby L. Evaluation of a new titanium-zirconium dental implant: a biomechanical and histological comparative study in the mini pig. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14(4):538–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Barter S, Stone P, Bragger U. A pilot study to evaluate the success and survival rate of titanium-zirconium implants in partially edentulous patients: results after 24 months of follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;7(23):873–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bernhard N, Berner S, De Wild M, Wieland M. The binary TiZr alloy—a newly developed Ti alloy for use in dental implants. Forum Implantol. 2009;5:30–9.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Branemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, Breine U, Lindstrom J, Hallen O, et al. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl. 1977;16:1–132.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Jokstad A. Oral implants—the future. Aust Dent J. 2008;53:S89–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Littell RC, Henry PR, Ammerman CB. Statistical analysis of repeated measures data using SAS procedures. J Anim Sci. 1998;76(4):1216–31.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Giavaresi G, Fini M, Cigada A, Chiesa R, Rondelli G, Rimondini L, et al. Mechanical and histomorphometric evaluations of titanium implants with different surface treatments inserted in sheep cortical bone. Biomaterials. 2003;24(9):1583–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Choi JY, Jung UW, Lee IS, Kim CS, Lee YK, Choi SH. Resolution of surgically created three-wall intrabony defects in implants using three different biomaterials: an in vivo study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(3):343–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Botticelli D, Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Resolution of bone defects of varying dimension and configuration in the marginal portion of the peri-implant bone. J Clin Periodontol. 2004;31(4):309–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Jung U-W, Moon H-I, Kim CS, Lee YK, Kim C-K, Choi S-H. Evaluation of different grafting materials in three-wall intra-bony defects around dental implants in beagle dogs. Curr Appl Phys. 2005;5(5):507–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kim C-S, Choi S-H, Chai J-K, Cho K-S, Moon I-S, Wikesjö UM, et al. Periodontal repair in surgically created intrabony defects in dogs: influence of the number of bone walls on healing response. J Periodontol. 2004;75(2):229–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Berglundh T, Abrahamsson I, Lang NP, Lindhe J. De novo alveolar bone formation adjacent to endosseous implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2003;14(3):251–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Park JW, Kim HK, Kim YJ, An CH, Hanawa T. Enhanced osteoconductivity of micro-structured titanium implants (XiVE S CELLplus) by addition of surface calcium chemistry: a histomorphometric study in the rabbit femur. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20(7):684–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Davies JE. Understanding peri-implant endosseous healing. J Dent Educ. 2003;67(8):932–49.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Davies JE. Bone bonding at natural and biomaterial surfaces. Biomaterials. 2007;28(34):5058–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Colon G, Ward BC, Webster TJ. Increased osteoblast and decreased Staphylococcus epidermidis functions on nanophase ZnO and TiO2. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2006;78(3):595–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Webster TJ, Ejiofor JU. Increased osteoblast adhesion on nanophase metals: Ti, Ti6Al4V, and CoCrMo. Biomaterials. 2004;25(19):4731–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Webster TJ, Schadler LS, Siegel RW, Bizios R. Mechanisms of enhanced osteoblast adhesion on nanophase alumina involve vitronectin. Tissue Eng. 2001;7(3):291–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Yao C, Perla V, McKenzie JL, Slamovich EB, Webster TJ. Anodized Ti and Ti 6 Al 4V possessing nanometer surface features enhances osteoblast adhesion. J Biomed Nanotechnol. 2005;1(1):68–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sista S, Wen C, Hodgson PD, Pande G. The influence of surface energy of titanium-zirconium alloy on osteoblast cell functions in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2011;1(97A):27–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Bornstein MM, Valderrama P, Jones AA, Wilson TG, Seibl R, Cochran DL. Bone apposition around two different sandblasted and acid-etched titanium implant surfaces: a histomorphometric study in canine mandibles. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008;19(3):233–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by Dentsply, Australia and Lottery Health Research Grant, New Zealand. We wish to acknowledge the assistance of Liz Girwan, Otago Centre for Electron Microscopy, University of Otago, for her assistance in the SEM. We wish to acknowledge the assistance of Andrew McNaughton, Otago Centre for Confocal Microscopy, University of Otago, for his assistance in the confocal microscopy. We acknowledge the assistance of Dave Mathews, Hercus Taieri Research Unit for his assistance in animal surgeries.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Dentistry, Sir John Walsh Research Institute, University of Otago, 310 Great King Street, Dunedin, 9016, New Zealand

    Ajay Sharma, John Neil Waddell & Warwick John Duncan

  2. Department of Chemistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

    A. James McQuillan

  3. Division of Biomaterials and Engineering, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Showa University School of Dentistry, Tokyo, Japan

    Yo Shibata

  4. Otago School of Medical Sciences, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

    Lavanya A. Sharma

Authors
  1. Ajay Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. James McQuillan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yo Shibata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lavanya A. Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. John Neil Waddell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Warwick John Duncan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ajay Sharma.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

We the authors of this manuscript declare that there is no potential conflict of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sharma, A., McQuillan, A.J., Shibata, Y. et al. Histomorphometric and histologic evaluation of titanium–zirconium (aTiZr) implants with anodized surfaces. J Mater Sci: Mater Med 27, 86 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-016-5695-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-016-5695-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation