{"title":"喷砂和酸蚀工艺对钛牙种植体中Al2O3颗粒的影响。","authors":"Peter Schupbach, Roland Glauser, Sebastian Bauer","doi":"10.1155/2019/6318429","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Dental implants with moderately rough surfaces show enhanced osseointegration and faster bone healing compared with machined surfaces. The sandblasting and acid-etching (SA) process is one technique to create moderately rough dental implant surfaces. The purpose of this study was to analyse different commercially available implant systems with a SA-modified surface and to explore the widespread notion that they have similar surface properties regarding morphology and cleanliness. SA-modified surfaces of nine implant systems manufactured by Alpha-Bio Tec Ltd, Camlog Biotechnologies AG, Dentsply Sirona Dental GmbH, Neoss Ltd, Osstem Implant Co. Ltd, Institute Straumann AG, and Thommen Medical AG were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) and examined for surface cleanliness. Six implants from three different lots were selected per each implant system. Mean particle counts for each implant and the mean size of the particles were calculated from three different regions of interest and compared using ANOVA and Tukey's test. SEM analysis showed presence of particles on the majority of analyzed implant surfaces, and EDX evaluations determined that the particles were made of Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> and thus remnants of the blasting process. SPI®ELEMENT INICELL® and Bone Level (BL) Roxolid® SLActive® implant surfaces showed the highest mean particle counts, 46.6 and 50.3 per area, respectively. The surface of BL Roxolid® SLActive® implant also showed the highest variations in the particle counts, even in samples from the same lot. The mean size of particles was 1120±1011 <i>μ</i>m<sup>2</sup>, measured for USIII CA Fixture implants, while the biggest particle was 5900 <i>μ</i>m<sup>2</sup> found on a BL Roxolid® SLActive® implant. These results suggest that not all manufacturers are able to produce implant surfaces without particle contamination and highlight that the surface modification process with the SA technique should be appropriately designed and controlled to achieve a clean and consistent final medical device.</p>","PeriodicalId":13704,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Biomaterials","volume":"2019 ","pages":"6318429"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2019/6318429","citationCount":"29","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> Particles on Titanium Dental Implant Systems following Sandblasting and Acid-Etching Process.\",\"authors\":\"Peter Schupbach, Roland Glauser, Sebastian Bauer\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2019/6318429\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Dental implants with moderately rough surfaces show enhanced osseointegration and faster bone healing compared with machined surfaces. The sandblasting and acid-etching (SA) process is one technique to create moderately rough dental implant surfaces. The purpose of this study was to analyse different commercially available implant systems with a SA-modified surface and to explore the widespread notion that they have similar surface properties regarding morphology and cleanliness. SA-modified surfaces of nine implant systems manufactured by Alpha-Bio Tec Ltd, Camlog Biotechnologies AG, Dentsply Sirona Dental GmbH, Neoss Ltd, Osstem Implant Co. Ltd, Institute Straumann AG, and Thommen Medical AG were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) and examined for surface cleanliness. Six implants from three different lots were selected per each implant system. Mean particle counts for each implant and the mean size of the particles were calculated from three different regions of interest and compared using ANOVA and Tukey's test. SEM analysis showed presence of particles on the majority of analyzed implant surfaces, and EDX evaluations determined that the particles were made of Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> and thus remnants of the blasting process. SPI®ELEMENT INICELL® and Bone Level (BL) Roxolid® SLActive® implant surfaces showed the highest mean particle counts, 46.6 and 50.3 per area, respectively. The surface of BL Roxolid® SLActive® implant also showed the highest variations in the particle counts, even in samples from the same lot. The mean size of particles was 1120±1011 <i>μ</i>m<sup>2</sup>, measured for USIII CA Fixture implants, while the biggest particle was 5900 <i>μ</i>m<sup>2</sup> found on a BL Roxolid® SLActive® implant. These results suggest that not all manufacturers are able to produce implant surfaces without particle contamination and highlight that the surface modification process with the SA technique should be appropriately designed and controlled to achieve a clean and consistent final medical device.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13704,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Biomaterials\",\"volume\":\"2019 \",\"pages\":\"6318429\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2019/6318429\",\"citationCount\":\"29\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Biomaterials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6318429\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2019/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Biomaterials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6318429","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29
摘要
与机械加工表面相比,中等粗糙表面的牙种植体表现出增强的骨整合和更快的骨愈合。喷砂和酸蚀(SA)工艺是一种技术,以创造中等粗糙的牙种植体表面。本研究的目的是分析具有sa修饰表面的不同市售植入系统,并探讨它们在形貌和清洁度方面具有相似表面特性的广泛概念。使用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)和能量色散x射线光谱(EDX)分析了Alpha-Bio Tec Ltd、Camlog Biotechnologies AG、Dentsply Sirona Dental GmbH、Neoss Ltd、Osstem implant Co Ltd、Institute Straumann AG和Thommen Medical AG生产的9种种植系统的sa修饰表面,并检查了表面清洁度。每个种植系统从三个不同批次中选择六个种植体。从三个不同的感兴趣区域计算每个植入物的平均颗粒计数和颗粒的平均大小,并使用方差分析和Tukey检验进行比较。SEM分析显示,在大多数分析的植入物表面存在颗粒,EDX评估确定颗粒由Al2O3制成,因此是爆破过程的残留物。SPI®ELEMENT INICELL®和Bone Level (BL) Roxolid®SLActive®种植体表面显示最高的平均颗粒计数,分别为每面积46.6和50.3。即使在同一批次的样品中,BL Roxolid®SLActive®植入物的表面也显示出最高的颗粒计数变化。USIII CA Fixture种植体的平均颗粒大小为1120±1011 μm2, BL Roxolid®SLActive®种植体的最大颗粒大小为5900 μm2。这些结果表明,并非所有制造商都能够生产无颗粒污染的植入物表面,并强调应适当设计和控制使用SA技术的表面修饰过程,以实现清洁和一致的最终医疗器械。
Al2O3 Particles on Titanium Dental Implant Systems following Sandblasting and Acid-Etching Process.
Dental implants with moderately rough surfaces show enhanced osseointegration and faster bone healing compared with machined surfaces. The sandblasting and acid-etching (SA) process is one technique to create moderately rough dental implant surfaces. The purpose of this study was to analyse different commercially available implant systems with a SA-modified surface and to explore the widespread notion that they have similar surface properties regarding morphology and cleanliness. SA-modified surfaces of nine implant systems manufactured by Alpha-Bio Tec Ltd, Camlog Biotechnologies AG, Dentsply Sirona Dental GmbH, Neoss Ltd, Osstem Implant Co. Ltd, Institute Straumann AG, and Thommen Medical AG were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) and examined for surface cleanliness. Six implants from three different lots were selected per each implant system. Mean particle counts for each implant and the mean size of the particles were calculated from three different regions of interest and compared using ANOVA and Tukey's test. SEM analysis showed presence of particles on the majority of analyzed implant surfaces, and EDX evaluations determined that the particles were made of Al2O3 and thus remnants of the blasting process. SPI®ELEMENT INICELL® and Bone Level (BL) Roxolid® SLActive® implant surfaces showed the highest mean particle counts, 46.6 and 50.3 per area, respectively. The surface of BL Roxolid® SLActive® implant also showed the highest variations in the particle counts, even in samples from the same lot. The mean size of particles was 1120±1011 μm2, measured for USIII CA Fixture implants, while the biggest particle was 5900 μm2 found on a BL Roxolid® SLActive® implant. These results suggest that not all manufacturers are able to produce implant surfaces without particle contamination and highlight that the surface modification process with the SA technique should be appropriately designed and controlled to achieve a clean and consistent final medical device.