IP Annals of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry

Print ISSN: 2581-4796

Online ISSN: 2581-480X

IP Annals of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry (APRD) open access, peer-reviewed quarterly journal publishing since 2015 and is published under the Khyati Education and Research Foundation (KERF), is registered as a non-profit society (under the society registration act, 1860), Government of India with the vision of various accredited vocational courses in healthcare, education, paramedical, yoga, publication, teaching and research activity, with the aim of faster and better dissemination of knowledge, we will be publishing the article more...

  • Article highlights
  • Article tables
  • Article images

Article statistics

Viewed: 477

PDF Downloaded: 1448


Get Permission Pravin, Jain, Beohar, Soni, Verma, and Hassan: An overview of dental implants biomaterials - A review


Introduction

Implant Prosthodontics is the phase of Prosthodontics concerned with the replacement of the missing teeth and the associated structures attached to the implant. The goal of modern implantology is to restore the form, function, contour, esthetics, speech and health regardless of the extent of the injury. Hence, it is very much important to analyse each and every parameter of the implant which can ultimately lead to success. The longevity of the implants depends on biomaterials, biomechanics, biological tissues and body serviceability. Initially implants used of stone and ivory were reported in China and Egypt. In the 16th and 17th centuries gold and ivory dental implants were used.1

In the early 20th century, metal Implants of Gold, Lead, Iridium, Tantalum, stainless steel and cobalt alloy were used. Between these two periods a variety of polymers, have been used as dental implant. Newer materials like Zirconia, roxolid, surface modified titanium implants are used as they not only fulfill the functional requirements but are also esthetically pleasing. The terminology "osseointegration" and bone adaptation to a dental implant has been largely contested in the dental literature since Professor Branemark introduced it. In the current era, the term "fibro-osseous integration" describes the placement of a peri-implant ligament between bone and implant resulting in a substantial reduction in bone load. A biomaterial is also known as a biological material or synthetic material, which is used to reconstruct an aspect of a living form so that it can continue to interact with living tissues. The most important aspect of biocompatibility is the material used to make dental implants.2, 3

Table 1

Classification of dental implant biomaterials

Based on biocompatibility

Based on Chemical Composition

Bio-tolerant

Metals

Ceramics

Polymers

Gold

Polyethylene

Cobalt-chromium alloys

Polyamide

Stainless steel

Polymethylmethacrylate

Zirconium

Polytetrafluroethylene

Niobium

Polyurethane

Tantalum

Bio-inert

Commercially pure titanium

Aluminum oxide

Titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V)

Zirconium oxide

Poly-ether-ether-ketone

Bioactive

Hydroxyapatite

Tricalcium phosphate Tetracalcium phosphate

Calcium pyrophosphate Fluorapatite

Brushite

Carbon-silicon

Bioglass

Properties of Biomaterials Mechanical Properties 4, 5, 6

  1. Modulus of elasticity (E)-Ideally a biomaterial with elastic modulus comparable to bone (18GPa) should be selected. This will ensure more uniform distribution of stress at implant bone interface as under stress both of them will deform similarly. Hence the relative movement at implant bone interface is minimized. Compressive, shear strength to prevent fractures and improve functional stability.

  2. Tensile, Compressive, Shear, Strength - An implant material should have high tensile, of implant material. Increased toughness prevents fracture of the implants.

  3. Yield strength and Fatigue strength - An implant material should have high yield strength and fatigue strength to prevent brittle fracture under cyclic loading

  4. Ductility -ADA demands a minimum ductility of 8% for dental implant. Required for fabrication of optimal implant configurations.

  5. Hardness and Toughness - Increase hardness decreases the incidence of wear.

  6. Electrical and Thermal conductivity- Should be minimum to prevent thermal expansion, contraction, and oral galvanism.

  7. Surface tension and surface energy - Surface energy of > 40 dyne / cm. Surface tension of 40 dyne/cm or more.

  8. Biocompatibility- Ability of a material to perform with an appropriate biological response in a specific application.

Chemical properties 6, 7, 8

Corrosion is defined as loss of metallic ions from the surface of a metal to the surrounding environment.

Crevice corrosion - Occurs in narrow region e.g. implant screw – bone interface.

Pitting corrosion -Occurs in surface pit.

Metal ions dissolve and combine with Cl ions.

Galvanic corrosion- Occurs between two dissimilar metals in contact within an electrolyte resulting in current flow between the two.

Electrochemical corrosion- In this anodic oxidation and cathodic reduction takes place resulting in metal deterioration as well as charge transfer via electrons.

Different biomaterials

  1. Titanium and Titanium alloys- Titanium is one of the most biocompatible material due to its excellent corrosion resistance, due to the formation of biologically inert layer. 9, 10 It spontaneously forms tenacious surface oxide on exposure to the air or physiologic saline. There are four grades of Cp Ti. The mechanical differences that exist between the different grades of cpTi is primarily because of the contaminants that are present. Iron is added for corrosion resistance and aluminum is added for increased strength and decreased density, while vanadium acts as an aluminum scavenger to prevent corrosion. Good yield strength, tensile strength, fatigue strength, modulus of elasticity (110 GPa) which helps in uniform stress distribution. 10, 11, 12, 13Titanium alloys Ti6Al4V- Consists of - Titanium, 6% Aluminum which is an alpha stabilizer and 4% Vanadium which is a beta stabilizer. It exhibits excellent corrosion resistance, Oxide layer formed is resistant to charge transfer thus contributing to biocompatibility, and Modulus of elasticity is 5.6 times that of the bone, more uniform distribution of stress. Extensively used as implant material due to excellent biocompatibility, strength, osseointegration. 14

  2. Cobalt, Chromium, Molybdenum alloy – Vitallium was introduced in 1937 by Venable Strock and Beach. It is composed of 63% Cobalt, 30% Chromium and 5% Molybdenum. It has high mechanical strength, good corrosion resistance, Low ductility, direct apposition of bone to implant though seen; it is interspersed with fibrous tissue Uses. 15, 16Iron, Chromium, Nickel based alloy - These are surgical steel alloys or Austenitic steel. Have a long history of use as orthopedic and dental implant devices. It has high mechanical strength, high ductility and Pitting and crevice corrosion. 5

  3. Iron, Chromium, Nickel based alloy - These are surgical steel alloys or Austenitic steel .Have a long history of use as orthopedic and dental implant devices. It has high mechanical strength, high ductility and Pitting and crevice corrosion. 5

  4. Precious metals- include Gold, Platinum, and Palladium. They are noble metals unaffected by air, moisture, heat and most solvents. Does not depend on surface oxides for their inertness and have Low mechanical strength and does not demonstrate osseointegration, hence not used.

  5. Ceramics - Ceramics are inorganic, non metallic materials manufactured by compacting and sintering at elevated temperature. It Consists of- Bioinert ceramics which includes Aluminum oxide, Titanium oxide, Zirconium oxide; Bioactive ceramics which includes Calcium phosphate ceramics, hydroxyapatite, tricalcium phosphate. Bioinert ceramics are full oxides i.e. bulk and surface thus excellent bio compatibility. It has good mechanical strength, low ductility which results in brittleness and Color is similar to hard tissue. It is used as surface coatings over metals and to enhance their biocompatibility. Bioactive ceramics- CPC have biochemical composition similar to natural bone and forms direct chemical bonding with surrounding bone due to presence of free calcium and phosphate compounds as implant surface. Lower mechanical tensile and shear and fatigue strength. CPC show varied degree of resorption or solubility in physiologic fluids .The resorption depends on crystalline. Glass ceramics are bioactive ceramics. Silica based glass with additions of calcium and phosphate produced by controlled crystallization. It has high mechanical strength and less resistant to tensile and bending stresses. They chemically bond to the bone due to formation of calcium phosphate surface layer. 17

  6. Carbon and carbon silicon compounds - Vitreous Carbon and Carbon compounds were introduced in 1960 for use in implantology. They are Inert, biocompatible, have Modulus of elasticity close to that of bone and are susceptible to fracture under tensile stress.

  7. Polymers- Polymeric implants were first introduced in 1930s. However they have not found extensive use in implant due to their Low mechanical strength and lack of osseointegration.[18,19]18

  8. Composites - Combination of polymer and other synthetic biomaterial. They have advantages that properties can be altered to suit clinical application.

  9. Zirconia- It was used for dental prosthetic surgery with endosseous implants in early nineties. Monoclinic, cubic and tetragonal are the three crystal forms in which polymorphic Zirconia structure is present. Zirconia, on room temperature, acquires a monoclinic structure and changes into tetragonal phase at 1170 °C, followed by a cubic phase at 2370 °C. 19, 20

Implant Surface Characterization

Implant surface characterization helps to increase the interaction between the host tissue and the implant. The following techniques can be used to increase the characterization. 21, 22

Sandblasting- Small grits in chosen shape and size are forced across implant surfaces by compressed air that creates a crater. The blasting media can be Alumina oxide or titanium oxide. Sandblasting has been shown to allow the adhesion, proliferation and differentiation of osteoblasts.

Acid etching- Immersing Implants in strong acids (e.g., nitric acid, hydrochloric acid, hydrofluoric acid, sulfuric acid and their mixtures) for a given period of time, creates a micro- roughness of 0.5–3 μm.

Sand blasted and acid etched surface (SLA) - SLA combines sandblasting and acid-etching.

Anodized surfaces- The oxidation process has been used in dental implants to change the characteristics of the oxide layer and consequently to improve the biocompatibility of the surface.

Surface coatings- Implant surface may be covered with porous coatings which increases the surface area and roughness, attachment strength at bone implant interface and Biocompatibility. Several coating techniques exist. Two types – Plasma sprayed titanium and Plasma sprayed hydroxyapatite. Thickness of coating should be 0.04 to 0.05 mm. Increases the surface area by 600%. The particles melt and are sprayed on to the substrate. HA coated implants can be used in D3 and D4 bone which show poor bone density and structure as they increase bone contact levels, forms stronger bone implant interface, produces faster healing and greater initial stability.

Conclusion

Different varieties of implant biomaterials are available. The success and longevity of the implants depends on the appropriate selection of biomaterials. Thus it is very important to have an adequate knowledge of various materials and their properties which will render patient with a successful treatment.

Conflict of Interest

There are no conflicts of interest in this article.

Source of Funding

None.

References

1 

CE Misch Con temporary implant dentistryImplant Dent19998190

2 

G L Heness B Ben-Nissan Innovative bioceramicsMaterials forum20042710414

3 

RB Osman MV Swain A critical review of dental implant materials with an emphasis on titanium versus zirconiaMaterials (Basel)2015839325810.3390/ma8030932

4 

BC Muddugangadhar GS Amarnath S Tripathi SD Divya Biomaterials for Dental Implants: An OverviewInt J Oral Implantol Clin Res201121132410.5005/jp-journals-10012-1030

5 

A Wennerberg T Albrektsson On implant surfaces: A review of current knowledge and opinionsInt J Oral Maxillofac Implants20102516374

6 

TP Chaturvedi An overview of the corrosion aspect of dental implants (titanium and its alloys) IndianIndian J Dent Res200920191810.4103/0970-9290.49068

7 

G Manivasagam D Dhinasekaran A Rajamanickam Biomedical Implants: Corrosion and its Prevention - A ReviewRecent Patents Corrosion Sci201024054

8 

N Adya M Alam T Ravindranath A Mubeen B Saluja Corrosion in titanium dental implants: literature reviewJ Indian Prosthodont Soc2005531263110.4103/0972-4052.17104

9 

AN Cranin H Silverbrand J Sher N Satler The requirements and clinical performance of dental implantsBiocompatibility Dent Mater1982492102

10 

H Tschernitschek L Borchers W Geurtsen Nonalloyed titanium as a bioinert metal--a reviewQuintessence Int2005367-852330

11 

A Wennerberg T Albrektsson B Andersson Bone tissue response to commercially pure titanium implants blasted with fine and coarse particles of aluminum oxideInt J Oral Maxillofac Implants19961113845

12 

RM Meffert B Langer ME Fritz Dental implants: a reviewJ Periodontol199263118597010.1902/jop.1992.63.11.859

13 

D F Williams Implants in dental and maxillofacial surgeryBiomaterials1981231334610.1016/0142-9612(81)90039-9

14 

G Ravnholt Corrosion current and pH rise around titanium coupled to dental alloysScand J Dent Res19889654667210.1111/j.1600-0722.1988.tb01585.x

15 

K Arvidson M Cottler-Fox E Hammarlund U Friberg Cytotoxic effects of cobalt-chromium alloys on fibroblasts derived from human gingivaScand J Dent Res198795356363

16 

RW Phillips Skinner’s science of dental materials. 8th Edn.Philadelphia: WB Saunders1982

17 

N Sykaras AM Iacopino VA Marker RG Triplett RD Woody Implant materials, designs, and surface topographies: their effect on osseointegration. A literature reviewInt J Oral Maxillofac Implants200015567590

18 

M Hodosh M Povar G Shklar The dental polymer implant conceptJ Prosthet Dent19692233718010.1016/0022-3913(69)90200-5

19 

Z Ozkurt E Kazazoğlu Zirconia dental implants: a literature reviewJ Oral Implantol20113733677610.1563/AAID-JOI-D-09-00079

20 

ND Adatia SC Bayne LF Cooper JY Thompson Fracture resistance of yttria-stabilized zirconia dental implant abutmentsJ Prosthodont2009181172210.1111/j.1532-849X.2008.00378.x

21 

MG Newman H Takei PR Klokkevold FA Carranza Carranza's Clinical Periodontology - Pageburst E-Book on VitalSource (Retail Access Card). 11th Edn.Elsevier Inc

22 

DA Puleo MV Thomas Implant surfacesDent Clin North Am20065033233810.1016/j.cden.2006.03.001



jats-html.xsl


This is an Open Access (OA) journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Article type

Review Article


Article page

63-66


Authors Details

Surabhi Dudhe Pravin*, Ruchi Jain, Gaurav Beohar, Kapil Soni, Binoo Verma, Shaik Ali Hassan


Article History

Received : 21-03-2023

Accepted : 03-04-2023


Article Metrics


View Article As

 


Downlaod Files