Leading Research PaperDental ImplantsComparison of zirconia and titanium implants after a short healing period. A pilot study in minipigs
Section snippets
Materials and methods
The study was performed on 7 one-year-old miniature pigs. Two types of implants were studied: zirconia and titanium. Zirconia implants (diameter 4 mm, length 10 mm) were manufactured from yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystalline (whiteSKY, Bredent, Germany). The surface was sandblasted. According to the producers, the physical surface roughness parameters were: Ra 1.0 μm and Rt 7.2 μm. Titanium implants (Xive, Dentsply, Friadent, Germany) had a sandblasted, acid-etched surface, Ra 2.75
Results
All animals survived the treatment and were available for evaluation. One submerged zirconia implant was lost and was unavailable for histological examination. The clinical intraoral examination performed prior to death showed one non-submerged zirconia implant to be clinically mobile. The remaining 19 implants did not show any signs of inflammation and were clinically stable. The non-submerged implants showed a tight adaptation of the peri-implant mucosa to the implant body. There was no
Discussion
The purpose of the present study was to compare the healing of submerged and non-submerged, sandblasted zirconia implants in the mandible of seven minipigs after a short healing period of 4 weeks, and to compare this with sandblasted, acid-etched titanium implants.
Soft tissue evaluation revealed that non-submerged zirconia implants showed a close soft tissue adaptation and prove to be highly biocompatible. Analysis of the hard tissue healing of both submerged and non-submerged zirconia implants
Competing interests
None declared.
Funding
The study was funded by the department's own resources. The zirconia implants were donated by Bredent medical.
Ethical approval
The study protocol was approved by the Commission for Animal Studies at the District Government Office, Dresden, Germany.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Mrs Ines Kleiber, Mr Volkmar Lieder, Dr Roland Jung and Dr Kathrin Spekl for their extensive assistance during the study period. Further we thank Mr. Ian Chambers for helping to prepare the manuscript.
References (29)
- et al.
Initial bone–implant interfaces of submergible and supramergible endosseous single-crystal sapphire implants
J Prosthet Dent
(1986) - et al.
Comparison between freestanding and tooth-connected partially stabilized zirconia implants after two years’ function in monkeys: a clinical and histologic study
J Prosthet Dent
(1998) - et al.
Interface histology of unloaded and early loaded partially stabilized zirconia endosseous implant in initial bone healing
J Prosthet Dent
(1993) - et al.
Interface analysis of titanium and zirconium bone implants
Biomaterials
(1985) - et al.
Fracture resistance of single-tooth implant-supported all-ceramic restorations: an in vitro study
J Prosthet Dent
(2006) - et al.
Zirconium oxide: analysis of MG63 osteoblast-like cell response by means of a microarray technology
Biomaterials
(2004) - et al.
Y-TZP ceramics for artificial joint replacements
Biomaterials
(1998) - et al.
Are ceramic implants a viable alternative to titanium implants? A systematic literature review
Clin Oral Implants Res
(2009) - et al.
A 5-year longitudinal study of the clinical effectiveness of ITI solid-screw implants in the treatment of mandibular edentulism
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants
(2002) - et al.
The soft tissue barrier at implants and teeth
Clin Oral Implants Res
(1991)
Mechanical properties and surface analysis of retrieved zirconia hip joint heads after an implantation time of two to three years
J Mater Sci Mater Med
Mechanical properties and short-term in-vivo evaluation of yttrium-oxide-partially-stabilized zirconia
J Biomed Mater Res
Clinical field trial examining an implant with a sand-blasted, acid-etched surface
J Periodontol
Osseointegration of zirconia implants compared with titanium: an in vivo study
Head Face Med
Cited by (79)
Effect of milled and lithography-based additively manufactured zirconia (3Y-TZP) on the biological properties of human osteoblasts
2023, Journal of Prosthetic DentistryA chlorogenic acid-chitosan complex bifunctional coating for improving osteogenesis differentiation and bactericidal properties of zirconia implants
2023, Colloids and Surfaces B: BiointerfacesThe primary stability of two dental implant systems in low-density bone
2022, International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryNanosecond laser induced microstructure features and effects thereof on the wettability in zirconia
2020, Ceramics InternationalEvaluation of insertion torque and surface integrity of zirconia-coated titanium mini screw implants
2020, Journal of the World Federation of OrthodontistsInfluence of laser texturing on surface features, mechanical properties and low-temperature degradation behavior of 3Y-TZP
2020, Ceramics InternationalCitation Excerpt :Zirconia is widely used as a biomaterial due to its combination of biocompatibility and desirable mechanical properties [1,2]. In terms of osseointegration and biocompatibility, several studies have shown that zirconia implants exhibit comparable results to titanium implants [3,4]. Furthermore, zirconia have shown enhanced features over titanium, such as high affinity to soft tissue, aesthetical and non-carcinogenic properties [2,5].