Anodized Surface and Its Clinical Performance

Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

Many implant surfaces and surface-modification techniques have been examined, and anodized surface on dental implant has been in continued clinical use and has demonstrated good stability during the healing phase. This proof has provided the basis for treatment modality of immediate function.

In this chapter, the evidences based on the clinical and basic study reporting the success of osseointegrated implants regarding anodized surface will be reviewed. An understanding of the current evidence may facilitate the most appropriate utilization of this important dental resource.

Keywords

Dental implant Titanium surface Anodized surface TiUnite Success rate Osseointegration Wound healing 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Brånemark PI, Adell R, Albrektsson T, Lekholm U, Lundkvist S, Rockler B. Osseointegrated titanium fixtures in the treatment of edentulousness. Biomaterials. 1983;4:25–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Albrektsson T. Direct bone anchorage of dental implants. J Prosthet Dent. 1983;50:255–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kasemo B. Biocompatibility of titanium implants: surface science aspects. J Prosthet Dent. 1983;49:832–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sul YT, Johansson CB, Jeong Y, Albrektsson T. The electrochemical oxide growth behaviour on titanium in acid and alkaline electrolytes. Med Eng Phys. 2001;23:329–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Choi JW, Heo SJ, Koak JY, Kim SK, Lim YJ, Kim SH, et al. Biological responses of anodized titanium implants under different current voltages. J Oral Rehabil. 2006;33:889–97.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Larsson C, Thomsen P, Lausmaa J, Rodahl M, Kasemo B, Ericson LE. Bone response to surface modified titanium implants: studies on electropolished implants with different oxide thicknesses and morphology. Biomaterials. 1994;15:1062–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ishizawa H, Ogino M. Formation and characterization of anodic titanium oxide films containing Ca and P. J Biomed Mater Res. 1995;29:65–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Suh JY, Jang BC, Zhu X, Ong JL, Kim K. Effect of hydrothermally treated anodic oxide films on osteoblast attachment and proliferation. Biomaterials. 2003;24:347–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Li Y, Lee IS, Cui FZ, Choi SH. The biocompatibility of nanostructured calcium phosphate coated on micro-arc oxidized titanium. Biomaterials. 2008;29:2025–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Laurindo CA, Torres RD, Mali SA, Gilbert JL, Soares P. Incorporation of Ca and P on anodized titanium surface: Effect of high current density. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2014;37:223–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Velten D, Biehl V, Aubertin F, Valeske B, Possart W, Breme J. Preparation of TiO(2) layers on cp-Ti and Ti6Al4V by thermal and anodic oxidation and by sol-gel coating techniques and their characterization. J Biomed Mater Res. 2002;59:18–28.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhao G, Zinger O, Schwartz Z, Wieland M, Landolt D, Boyan BD. Osteoblast-like cells are sensitive to submicron-scale surface structure. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006;17:258–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Peterson AM, Pilz-Allen C, Kolesnikova T, Mohwald H, Shchukin D. Growth factor release from polyelectrolyte-coated titanium for implant applications. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2014;6:1866–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    El-wassefy NA, Hammouda IM, Habib AN, El-awady GY, Marzook HA. Assessment of anodized titanium implants bioactivity. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25:e1–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hieda J, Niinomi M, Nakai M, Cho K, Mohri T, Hanawa T. Adhesive strength of medical polymer on anodic oxide nanostructures fabricated on biomedical beta-type titanium alloy. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2014;36:244–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Puckett SD, Taylor E, Raimondo T, Webster TJ. The relationship between the nanostructure of titanium surfaces and bacterial attachment. Biomaterials. 2010;31:706–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zechner W, Tangl S, Furst G, Tepper G, Thams U, Mailath G, et al. Osseous healing characteristics of three different implant types. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2003;14:150–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schupbach P, Glauser R, Rocci A, Martignoni M, Sennerby L, Lundgren A, et al. The human bone-oxidized titanium implant interface: a light microscopic, scanning electron microscopic, back-scatter scanning electron microscopic, and energy-dispersive x-ray study of clinically retrieved dental implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2005;7 Suppl 1:S36–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vanegas-Acosta JC, Garzon-Alvarado DA, Lancellotti V. Numerical investigation into blood clotting at the bone-dental implant interface in the presence of an electrical stimulus. Comput Biol Med. 2013;43:2079–88.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kohal RJ, Bachle M, Att W, Chaar S, Altmann B, Renz A, et al. Osteoblast and bone tissue response to surface modified zirconia and titanium implant materials. Dent Mater. 2013;29:763–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liu R, Lei T, Dusevich V, Yao X, Liu Y, Walker MP, et al. Surface characteristics and cell adhesion: a comparative study of four commercial dental implants. J Prosthodont. 2013;22:641–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Choi JY, Lee HJ, Jang JU, Yeo IS. Comparison between bioactive fluoride modified and bioinert anodically oxidized implant surfaces in early bone response using rabbit tibia model. Implant Dent. 2012;21:124–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tabassum A, Walboomers F, Wolke JG, Meijer GJ, Jansen JA. The influence of surface roughness on the displacement of osteogenic bone particles during placement of titanium screw-type implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2011;13:269–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schupbach P, Glauser R. The defense architecture of the human periimplant mucosa: a histological study. J Prosthet Dent. 2007;97:S15–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    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;19:319–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zhang R, Liu Y, Yan K, Chen L, Chen XR, Li P, et al. Anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory mechanisms of mesenchymal stem cell transplantation in experimental traumatic brain injury. J Neuroinflammation. 2013;10:106.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Adell R, Lekholm U. On osseointegration – a response. N Y State Dent J. 1987;53:8–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sawase T, Wennerberg A, Hallgren C, Albrektsson T, Baba K. Chemical and topographical surface analysis of five different implant abutments. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11:44–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Baqain ZH, Moqbel WY, Sawair FA. Early dental implant failure: risk factors. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;50:239–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Charalampakis G, Abrahamsson I, Carcuac O, Dahlen G, Berglundh T. Microbiota in experimental periodontitis and peri-implantitis in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(9):1094–8.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gottlow J, Sennerby L, Rosengren A, Flynn M. An experimental evaluation of a new craniofacial implant using the rabbit tibia model: part I. Histologic findings. Otol Neurotol. 2010;31:832–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Friberg B, Jisander S, Widmark G, Lundgren A, Ivanoff CJ, Sennerby L, et al. One-year prospective three-center study comparing the outcome of a “soft bone implant” (prototype Mk IV) and the standard Branemark implant. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2003;5:71–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Balshi TJ, Wolfinger GJ, Pryszlak MC, Balshi SF. Facial and oral reconstruction following trauma and failed chin implant: a case report. Implant Dent. 2005;14:221–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Balshi SF, Wolfinger GJ, Balshi TJ. Analysis of 164 titanium oxide-surface implants in completely edentulous arches for fixed prosthesis anchorage using the pterygomaxillary region. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2005;20:946–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Malo P, de Araujo Nobre M, Lopes A, Moss SM, Molina GJ. A longitudinal study of the survival of All-on-4 implants in the mandible with up to 10 years of follow-up. J Am Dent Assoc. 2011;142:310–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Malo P, de Araujo Nobre M, Lopes A, Francischone C, Rigolizzo M. “All-on-4” immediate-function concept for completely edentulous maxillae: a clinical report on the medium (3 years) and long-term (5 years) outcomes. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14 Suppl 1:e139–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mura P. Immediate loading of tapered implants placed in postextraction sockets: retrospective analysis of the 5-year clinical outcome. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14:565–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Francetti L, Romeo D, Corbella S, Taschieri S, Del Fabbro M. Bone level changes around axial and tilted implants in full-arch fixed immediate restorations. Interim results of a prospective study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14:646–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Galindo DF, Butura CC. Immediately loaded mandibular fixed implant prostheses using the all-on-four protocol: a report of 183 consecutively treated patients with 1 year of function in definitive prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012;27:628–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pomares C. A retrospective study of edentulous patients rehabilitated according to the ‘all-on-four’ or the ‘all-on-six’ immediate function concept using flapless computer-guided implant surgery. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2010;3:155–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Khatami AH, Smith CR. “All-on-four” immediate function concept and clinical report of treatment of an edentulous mandible with a fixed complete denture and milled titanium framework. J Prosthodont. 2008;17:47–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Malo P, Nobre Mde A, Petersson U, Wigren S. A pilot study of complete edentulous rehabilitation with immediate function using a new implant design: case series. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2006;8:223–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Agliardi E, Panigatti S, Clerico M, Villa C, Malo P. Immediate rehabilitation of the edentulous jaws with full fixed prostheses supported by four implants: interim results of a single cohort prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010;21:459–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Calandriello R, Tomatis M. Immediate occlusal loading of single lower molars using Branemark System(R) Wide Platform TiUnite implants: a 5-year follow-up report of a prospective clinical multicenter study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2011;13:311–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Glauser R, Ree A, Lundgren A, Gottlow J, Hammerle CH, Scharer P. Immediate occlusal loading of Branemark implants applied in various jawbone regions: a prospective, 1-year clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2001;3:204–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Degidi M, Scarano A, Iezzi G, Piattelli A. Histologic analysis of an immediately loaded implant retrieved after 2 months. J Oral Implantol. 2005;31:247–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Glauser R, Zembic A, Ruhstaller P, Windisch S. Five-year results of implants with an oxidized surface placed predominantly in soft quality bone and subjected to immediate occlusal loading. J Prosthet Dent. 2007;97:S59–68.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Degidi M, Nardi D, Piattelli A. 10-year follow-up of immediately loaded implants with TiUnite porous anodized surface. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14:828–38.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ostman PO, Hellman M, Sennerby L. Ten years later. Results from a prospective single-centre clinical study on 121 oxidized (TiUnite) Branemark implants in 46 patients. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14:852–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Albrektsson T, Buser D, Sennerby L. Crestal bone loss and oral implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14:783–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Polizzi G, Gualini F, Friberg B. A two-center retrospective analysis of long-term clinical and radiologic data of TiUnite and turned implants placed in the same mouth. Int J Prosthodont. 2013;26:350–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Calandriello R, Tomatis M, Vallone R, Rangert B, Gottlow J. Immediate occlusal loading of single lower molars using Branemark System Wide-Platform TiUnite implants: an interim report of a prospective open-ended clinical multicenter study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2003;5 Suppl 1:74–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Cornelini R, Cangini F, Covani U, Barone A, Buser D. Immediate restoration of single-tooth implants in mandibular molar sites: a 12-month preliminary report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19:855–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Rao W, Benzi R. Single mandibular first molar implants with flapless guided surgery and immediate function: preliminary clinical and radiographic results of a prospective study. J Prosthet Dent. 2007;97:S3–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Schincaglia GP, Marzola R, Giovanni GF, Chiara CS, Scotti R. Replacement of mandibular molars with single-unit restorations supported by wide-body implants: immediate versus delayed loading. A randomized controlled study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23:474–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Filippi A, Higginbottom FL, Lambrecht T, Levin BP, Meier JL, Rosen PS, et al. A prospective noninterventional study to document implant success and survival of the Straumann Bone Level SLActive dental implant in daily dental practice. Quintessence Int. 2013;44:499–512.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Vanlioglu B, Ozkan Y, Kulak-Ozkan Y. Retrospective analysis of prosthetic complications of implant-supported fixed partial dentures after an observation period of 5 to 10 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013;28:1300–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Akoglu B, Ucankale M, Ozkan Y, Kulak-Ozkan Y. Five-year treatment outcomes with three brands of implants supporting mandibular overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26:188–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Gotfredsen K. A 5-year prospective study of single-tooth replacements supported by the Astra Tech implant: a pilot study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2004;6:1–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Lekholm U, Gunne J, Henry P, Higuchi K, Linden U, Bergstrom C, et al. Survival of the Branemark implant in partially edentulous jaws: a 10-year prospective multicenter study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999;14:639–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Jung UW, Choi JY, Kim CS, Cho KS, Chai JK, Kim CK, et al. Evaluation of mandibular posterior single implants with two different surfaces: a 5-year comparative study. J Periodontol. 2008;79:1857–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Zembic A, Bosch A, Jung RE, Hammerle CH, Sailer I. Five-year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing zirconia and titanium abutments supporting single-implant crowns in canine and posterior regions. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24:384–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Section of Implant and Rehabilitative Dentistry, Division of Oral RehabilitationFaculty of Dental Science, Kyushu UniversityFukuokaJapan
  2. 2.Section of Implant and Rehabilitative Dentistry, Division of Oral RehabilitationKyushu UniversityFukuokaJapan

Personalised recommendations