nach oben

wissen kompakt

Erschienen in:

28.04.2022 | CME Zahnärztliche Fortbildung

Implantatoberflächen und klinische Performance: wo ist die Evidenz?

verfasst von: Dr. P. Donkiewicz, M.Sc., P. W. Kämmerer

Erschienen in: wissen kompakt | Ausgabe 2/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Zusammenfassung

Die Verlustrate von Zahnimplantaten liegt bei 1 bis 2 % in der initialen Einheilungsphase, während etwa 5 % nach erfolgreicher Osseointegration, zumeist aufgrund einer Periimplantitis über einen Zeitraum von 10 Jahren, verloren gehen. Implantathersteller haben verschiedene Oberflächen entwickelt, deren Eigenschaften die Erfolgs- und Überlebensraten begünstigen sollen. Mittels makrotopographischer Parameter (Breite, Länge, Gewinde) lässt sich die Primärstabilität regulieren, was gerade bei unvorteilhaften Knochenverhältnissen sinnvoll sein kann, während Mikro- und Nanotopographie sich auf die Sekundärstabilität und Osseointegration auswirken. Hierbei zeigt die gegenwärtige Evidenz einen Vorteil für physikalisch und/oder chemisch prozessierte gegenüber rein mechanisch behandelten Implantaten auf. Jedoch lässt sich aufgrund fehlender Langzeitdaten und Vergleichsstudien sowie vergleichbarer Überlebensraten kein Rückschluss auf die klinische Effektivität einzelner Modifikationen ziehen.

ZM Online, DGI. In Deutschland werden jährlich 1,3 Millionen Implantate gesetzt – ZWP online – das Nachrichtenportal für die Dentalbranche (zwp-online.info)

Chrcanovic BR, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A (2014) Reasons for failures of oral implants. J Oral Rehabil 41(6):443–476PubMedCrossRef

Smeets R, Henningsen A, Jung O, Heiland M, Hammächer C, Stein JM (2014) Definition, etiology, prevention and treatment of peri-implantitis—a review. Head Face Med 10(1):1–13CrossRef

Branemark PI (1983) Osseointegration and its experimental background. J Prosthet Dent 50:399–410PubMedCrossRef

Chiapasco M, Casentini P, Zaniboni M, Corsi E, Anello T (2012) Titanium–zirconium alloy narrow-diameter implants (S traumann R oxolid®) for the rehabilitation of horizontally deficient edentulous ridges: prospective study on 18 consecutive patients. Clin Oral Impl Res 23(10):1136–1141CrossRef

Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A (2019) On osseointegration in relation to implant surfaces. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 21:4–7PubMedCrossRef

Trisi P, Rebaudi A (2002) Progressive bone adaptation of titanium implants during and after orthodontic load in humans. Int J Periodontics Restor Dent 22(1):31–43

Greenstein G, Cavallaro J (2017) Implant insertion torque: its role in achieving primary stability of restorable dental implants. Compend Continuing Educ Dent 38(2):88–95

Johansson C, Albrektsson T (1987) Integration of screw implants in the rabbit: a 1‑yr follow-up of removal torque of titanium implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 2(2):74–88

10.

Rozé J, Babu S, Saffarzadeh A, Gayet-Delacroix M, Hoornaert A, Layrolle P (2009) Correlating implant stability to bone structure. Clin Oral Impl Res 20(10):1140–1145CrossRef

11.

Raghavendra S, Wood MC, Taylor TD (2005) Early wound healing around endosseous implants: a review of the literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 20(3):425–431

12.

Chang PC, Lang NP, Giannobile WV (2010) Evaluation of functional dynamics during osseointegration and regeneration associated with oral implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 21(1):1–12CrossRef

13.

Jordana F, Susbielles L, Colat-Parros J (2018) Periimplantitis and implant body roughness: a systematic review of literature. Implant Dent 27(6):672–681PubMedCrossRef

14.

Pandey A, Awasthi A, Saxena KK (2020) Metallic implants with properties and latest production techniques: a review. Adv Mater Process Technol 6(2):405–440

15.

Osman RB, Swain MV (2015) A critical review of dental implant materials with an emphasis on titanium versus zirconia. materials 8(3):932–958PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

16.

Moy PK, Medina D, Shetty V, Aghaloo TL (2005) Dental implant failure rates and associated risk factors. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 20(4):569–577

17.

Grossmann Y, Levin L (2007) Success and survival of single dental implants placed in sites of previously failed implants. J Periodontol 78(9):1670–1674PubMedCrossRef

18.

Agari K, Le B (2020) Successive reimplantation of dental implants into sites of previous failure. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 78(3):375–385PubMedCrossRef

19.

Vollmer A, Saravi B, Lang G, Adolphs N, Hazard D, Giers V, Stoll P (2020) Factors influencing primary and secondary implant stability—a retrospective cohort study with 582 implants in 272 patients. Appl Sci 10(22):8084CrossRef

20.

Romanos GE, Ciornei G, Jucan A, Malmstrom H, Gupta B (2014) In vitro assessment of primary stability of Straumann® implant designs. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 16(1):89–95PubMedCrossRef

21.

Sennerby L, Pagliani L, Petersson A, Verrocchi D, Volpe S, Andersson P (2015) Two different implant designs and impact of related drilling protocols on primary stability in different bone densities: an in vitro comparison study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 30(3):564–568CrossRef

22.

Atieh MA, Alsabeeha N, Duncan WJ (2018) Stability of tapered and parallel-walled dental implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 20(4):634–645PubMedCrossRef

23.

Jokstad A, Ganeles J (2018) Systematic review of clinical and patient-reported outcomes following oral rehabilitation on dental implants with a tapered compared to a non-tapered implant design. Clin Oral Impl Res 29:41–54CrossRef

24.

Alshehri M, Alshehri F (2016) Influence of implant shape (tapered vs cylindrical) on the survival of dental implants placed in the posterior maxilla: a systematic review. Implant Dent 25(6):855–860PubMedCrossRef

25.

Waechter J, Madruga MDM, Carmo Filho LCD, Leite FRM, Schinestsck AR, Faot F (2017) Comparison between tapered and cylindrical implants in the posterior regions of the mandible: A prospective, randomized, split-mouth clinical trial focusing on implant stability changes during early healing. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 19(4):733–741PubMedCrossRef

26.

Barikani H, Rashtak S, Akbari S, Badri S, Daneshparvar N, Rokn A (2013) The effect of implant length and diameter on the primary stability in different bone types. J Dent 10(5):449

27.

Winkler S, Morris HF, Ochi S (2000) Implant survival to 36 months as related to length and diameter. Ann Periodontol 5(1):22–31PubMedCrossRef

28.

Himmlova L, Kácovský A, Konvic̆ková S (2004) Influence of implant length and diameter on stress distribution: a finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 91(1):20–25PubMedCrossRef

29.

Palacios JA, Garcia JJ, Caramês JM, Quirynen M, da Silva MDN (2018) Short implants versus bone grafting and standard-length implants placement: a systematic review. Clin Oral Invest 22(1):69–80CrossRef

30.

Dias FDN, Pecorari VGA, Martins CB, Del Fabbro M, Casati MZ (2019) Short implants versus bone augmentation in combination with standard-length implants in posterior atrophic partially edentulous mandibles: systematic review and meta-analysis with the Bayesian approach. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 48(1):90–96CrossRef

31.

Cruz RS, Lemos CAA, de Batista VES, Yogui FC, Oliveira HFF, Verri FR (2021) Narrow-diameter implants versus regular-diameter implants for rehabilitation of the anterior region: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 50(5):674–682PubMedCrossRef

32.

Schiegnitz E, Al-Nawas B (2018) Narrow-diameter implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Impl Res 29:21–40CrossRef

33.

Oswal MM, Amasi UN, Oswal MS, Bhagat AS (2016) Influence of three different implant thread designs on stress distribution: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 16(4):359PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

34.

Orsini E, Giavaresi G, Trirè A, Ottani V, Salgarello S (2012) Dental implant thread pitch and its influence on the osseointegration process: an in vivo comparison study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 27(2):383–392

35.

Abuhussein H, Pagni G, Rebaudi A, Wang HL (2010) The effect of thread pattern upon implant osseointegration. Clin Oral Impl Res 21(2):129–136CrossRef

36.

McCullough JJ, Klokkevold PR (2017) The effect of implant macro-thread design on implant stability in the early post-operative period: a randomized, controlled pilot study. Clin Oral Impl Res 28(10):1218–1226CrossRef

37.

Emmert M, Spille J, Behrens E, Ayna M, Karayurek F, Wiltfang J, Gülses A (2021) Comparative assessment of the primary stability of Straumann® BLX implant design using an in-vitro sinus lift-simultaneous implant insertion modelPrimary Stability of Straumann® BLX implant design. J Oral Implantol. https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-20-00411CrossRefPubMed

38.

Emmert M, Gülses A, Behrens E, Karayürek F, Acil Y, Wiltfang J, Spille JH (2021) An experimental study on the effects of the cortical thickness and bone density on initial mechanical anchorage of different Straumann® implant designs. Int J Implant Dent 7(1):1–8CrossRef

39.

Ibrahim A, Heitzer M, Bock A, Peters F, Möhlhenrich SC, Hölzle F, Moddaber A, Kniha K (2020) Relationship between implant geometry and primary stability in different bony defects and variant bone densities: an in vitro study. materials 13(19):4349PubMedCentralCrossRef

40.

Menini M, Bagnasco F, Calimodio I, Di Tullio N, Delucchi F, Baldi D, Pera F (2020) Influence of implant thread morphology on primary stability: a prospective clinical study. Biomed Res Int. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6974050CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Kong L, Hu K, Li D, Song Y, Yang J, Wu Z, Liu B (2008) Evaluation of the cylinder implant thread height and width: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 23(1):65–74

42.

Amid R, Raoofi S, Kadkhodazadeh M, Movahhedi MR, Khademi M (2013) Effect of microthread design of dental implants on stress and strain patterns: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Biomed Tech Eng 58(5):457–467

43.

Niu W, Wang P, Zhu S, Liu Z, Ji P (2017) Marginal bone loss around dental implants with and without microthreads in the neck: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent 117(1):34–40PubMedCrossRef

44.

Al-Thobity AM, Kutkut A, Almas K (2017) Microthreaded implants and crestal bone loss: a systematic review. J Oral Implantol 43(2):157–166PubMedCrossRef

45.

Eraslan O, İnan Ö (2010) The effect of thread design on stress distribution in a solid screw implant: a 3D finite element analysis. Clin Oral Invest 14(4):411–416CrossRef

46.

Martin JY, Schwartz Z, Hummert TW, Schraub DM, Simpson J, Lankford J Jr, Dean DD, Cochran DL, Boyan B (1995) Effect of titanium surface roughness on proliferation, differentiation, and protein synthesis of human osteoblast-like cells (MG63). J Biomed Mater Res 29(3):389–401PubMedCrossRef

47.

Marinucci L, Balloni S, Becchetti E, Belcastro S, Guerra M, Calvitti M, Calvitti M, Lull C, Edoardo M, Locci P (2006) Effect of titanium surface roughness on human osteoblast proliferation and gene expression in vitro. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 21(5):719–725

48.

Kunrath MF, Piassarollo dos Santos R, Dias de Oliveira S de, Hubler R, Sesterheim P, Teixeira ER (2020) Osteoblastic cell behavior and early bacterial adhesion on macro-, micro-, and nanostructured titanium surfaces for biomedical implant applications. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 35(4):773–781CrossRef

49.

Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T (2010) On implant surfaces: a review of current knowledge and opinions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 25(1):63–74

50.

Alla RK, Ginjupalli K, Upadhya N, Shammas M, Ravi RK, Sekhar R (2011) Surface roughness of implants: a review. Trends Biomater Artif Organs 25(3):112–118

51.

Abraham CM (2014) Suppl 1: a brief historical perspective on dental implants, their surface coatings and treatments. Dent J 8:50–55

52.

Oates TW, Valderrama P, Bischof M, Nedir R, Jones A, Simpson J, Toutenburg H, Cochran DL (2007) Enhanced implant stability with a chemically modified SLA surface: a randomized pilot study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 22(5):755

53.

Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T, Linder E, Lang NP, Lindhe J (2004) Early bone formation adjacent to rough and turned endosseous implant surfaces: an experimental study in the dog. Clin Oral Implants Res 15(4):381–392PubMedCrossRef

54.

Buser D, Broggini N, Wieland M, Schenk RK, Denzer AJ, Cochran DL, Hoffmann B, Lussi A, Steinemann SG (2004) Enhanced bone apposition to a chemically modified SLA titanium surface. J Dent Res 83(7):529–533PubMedCrossRef

55.

Buser D, Schenk RK, Steinemann S, Fiorellini JP, Fox CH, Stich H (1991) Influence of surface characteristics on bone integration of titanium implants. A histomorphometric study in miniature pigs. J Biomed Mater Res 25(7):889–902PubMedCrossRef

56.

Han A, Li X, Huang B, Tsoi JKH, Matinlinna JP, Chen Z, Deng DM (2016) The effect of titanium implant surface modification on the dynamic process of initial microbial adhesion and biofilm formation. Int J Adhesion Adhesiv 69:125–132CrossRef

57.

Van Velzen FJ, Ofec R, Schulten EA, Ten Bruggenkate CM (2015) 10-year survival rate and the incidence of peri-implant disease of 374 titanium dental implants with a SLA surface: a prospective cohort study in 177 fully and partially edentulous patients. Clin Oral Impl Res 26(10):1121–1128CrossRef

58.

Kim S, Jung UW, Cho KS, Lee JS (2018) Retrospective radiographic observational study of 1692 Straumann tissue-level dental implants over 10 years: I. Implant survival and loss pattern. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 20(5):860–866PubMedCrossRef

59.

Beschnidt SM, Cacaci C, Dedeoglu K, Hildebrand D, Hulla H, Iglhaut G, Ackermann KL (2018) Implant success and survival rates in daily dental practice: 5‑year results of a non-interventional study using CAMLOG SCREW-LINE implants with or without platform-switching abutments. Int J Implant Dent 4(1):1–13CrossRef

60.

Krennmair G, Seemann R, Schmidinger S, Ewers R, Piehslinger E (2010) Clinical outcome of root-shaped dental implants of various diameters: 5‑year results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 25(2):367–366

61.

Wennerberg A, Galli S, Albrektsson T (2011) Current knowledge about the hydrophilic and nanostructured SLActive surface. Clin Cosmetic Investig Dent 3:59CrossRef

62.

Wennerberg A, Svanborg LM, Berner S, Andersson M (2013) Spontaneously formed nanostructures on titanium surfaces. Clin Oral Impl Res 24(2):203–209CrossRef

63.

Yuan Y, Hays MP, Hardwidge PR, Kim J (2017) Surface characteristics influencing bacterial adhesion to polymeric substrates. RSC Adv 7(23):14254–14261CrossRef

64.

Hao CP, Cao NJ, Zhu YH, Wang W (2021) The osseointegration and stability of dental implants with different surface treatments in animal models: a network meta-analysis. Sci Rep 11(1):1–12CrossRef

65.

Alayan J, Vaquette C, Saifzadeh S, Hutmacher D, Ivanovski S (2017) Comparison of early osseointegration of SLA® and SLActive® implants in maxillary sinus augmentation: a pilot study. Clin Oral Impl Res 28(11):1325–1333CrossRef

66.

Lang NP, Salvi GE, Huynh-Ba G, Ivanovski S, Donos N, Bosshardt DD (2011) Early osseointegration to hydrophilic and hydrophobic implant surfaces in humans. Clin Oral Impl Res 22(4):349–356CrossRef

67.

Heberer S, Kilic S, Hossamo J, Raguse JD, Nelson K (2011) Rehabilitation of irradiated patients with modified and conventional sandblasted acid-etched implants: preliminary results of a split-mouth study. Clin Oral Impl Res 22(5):546–551CrossRef

68.

Degidi M, Nardi D, Piatelli A (2013) Prospektive Fünf-Jahres-Verlaufsstudie definitiver Sofortversorgungen zahnloser Patienten mittels eines intraoral verschweißten Titan-Gerüsts

69.

Cruz HV, Henriques M, Teughels W, Celis JP, Rocha LA (2015) Combined influence of fluoride and biofilms on the biotribocorrosion behavior of titanium used for dental applications. J Bio Tribo Corrosion 1(3):1–12CrossRef

70.

Masaki C, Schneider GB, Zaharias R, Seabold D, Stanford C (2005) Effects of implant surface microtopography on osteoblast gene expression. Clin Oral Impl Res 16(6):650–656CrossRef

71.

Mertens C, Steveling HG (2011) Early and immediate loading of titanium implants with fluoride-modified surfaces: results of 5‑year prospective study. Clin Oral Impl Res 22(12):1354–1360CrossRef

72.

Cooper LF, Reside GJ, Raes F, Garriga JS, Tarrida LG, Wiltfang J, De Bruyn H (2014) Immediate provisionalization of dental implants placed in healed alveolar ridges and extraction sockets: a 5-year prospective evaluation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 29(3):709–717

73.

Östman PO, Wennerberg A, Ekestubbe A, Albrektsson T (2013) Immediate occlusal loading of NanoTite™ tapered implants: a prospective 1‑year clinical and radiographic study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 15(6):809–818PubMedCrossRef

74.

Sul YT, Johansson CB, Röser K, Albrektsson T (2002) Qualitative and quantitative observations of bone tissue reactions to anodised implants. Biomaterials 23(8):1809–1817PubMedCrossRef

75.

Hasan J, Chatterjee K (2015) Recent advances in engineering topography mediated antibacterial surfaces. Nanoscale 7(38):15568–15575PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

76.

Huang YH, Xiropaidis AV, Sorensen RG, Albandar JM, Hall J, Wikesjö UM (2005) Bone formation at titanium porous oxide (TiUnite™) oral implants in type IV bone. Clin Oral Impl Res 16(1):105–111CrossRef

77.

Rocci A, Rocci M, Rocci C, Scoccia A, Gargari M, Martignoni M, Gottlow M, Sennerby L (2013) Immediate loading of Brånemark system TiUnite and machined-surface implants in the posterior mandible, part II: a randomized open-ended 9‑year follow-up clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 28(3):891–895CrossRef

78.

Friberg B, Jemt T (2010) Clinical experience of tiunite™ implants: a 5‑year cross-sectional, retrospective follow-up study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 12:e95–e103PubMedCrossRef

79.

Degidi M, Nardi D, Piattelli A (2012) 10-year follow-up of immediately loaded implants with TiUnite porous anodized surface. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 14(6):828–838PubMedCrossRef

80.

Karl M, Albrektsson T (2017) Clinical performance of dental implants with a moderately rough (tiunite) surface: a meta-analysis of prospective clinical studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 32(4):717–734CrossRef

81.

Bonfante EA, Granato R, Marin C, Jimbo R, Giro G, Suzuki M, Coelho PG (2013) Biomechanical testing of microblasted, acid-etched/microblasted, anodized, and discrete crystalline deposition surfaces: an experimental study in beagle dogs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 28(1):136–142CrossRef

82.

Mendes VC, Moineddin R, Davies JE (2009) Discrete calcium phosphate nanocrystalline deposition enhances osteoconduction on titanium-based implant surfaces. J Biomed Mater Res A 90(2):577–585PubMedCrossRef

83.

Kulkarni Aranya A, Pushalkar S, Zhao M, LeGeros RZ, Zhang Y, Saxena D (2017) Antibacterial and bioactive coatings on titanium implant surfaces. J Biomed Mater Res A 105(8):2218–2227PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Implantatoberflächen und klinische Performance: wo ist die Evidenz?
verfasst von: Dr. P. Donkiewicz, M.Sc.
P. W. Kämmerer
Publikationsdatum: 28.04.2022
Verlag: Springer Medizin
Erschienen in: wissen kompakt / Ausgabe 2/2022
Print ISSN: 1863-2637
Elektronische ISSN: 2190-3816
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11838-022-00150-y

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

19.04.2024 | Vorhofflimmern | Nachrichten

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Implantatoberflächen und klinische Performance: wo ist die Evidenz?

Zusammenfassung

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Invasive Zahnbehandlung: Wann eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe vor infektiöser Endokarditis schützt

Zell-Organisatoren unter Druck: Mechanismen des embryonalen Zahnwachstums aufgedeckt

Die Oralprophylaxe & Kinderzahnheilkunde umbenannt

Newsletter

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Zusammenfassung

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2022

Hat das Implantatdesign einen Einfluss auf die Entstehung einer Periimplantitis?

Zahnärztliche Implantate – die Form folgt der Funktion?

Einfluss der Implantatgeometrie auf die Primärstabilität

CAD/CAM-gefertigte individuelle dentale Implantate

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Invasive Zahnbehandlung: Wann eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe vor infektiöser Endokarditis schützt

Zell-Organisatoren unter Druck: Mechanismen des embryonalen Zahnwachstums aufgedeckt

Die Oralprophylaxe & Kinderzahnheilkunde umbenannt

Newsletter