5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Treatment with Dental Implants with Acid Etched Surface

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Implant dentistry constitutes a therapeutic modality in the prosthodontic treatment of partially and totally edentulous patients. This study reports a long-term evaluation of treatment by the early loading of acid-etched surface implants. Forty-eight partially and totally edentulous patients were treated with 169 TSA Defcon® acid-etched surface implants for prosthodontic rehabilitation. Implants were loaded after a healing free-loading period of 6–8 weeks in mandible and maxilla, respectively. Implant and prosthodontic clinical findings were followed during at least 17 years. Clinical results indicate a survival and success rate of implants of 92.9%, demonstrating that acid-etched surface achieves and maintains successful osseointegration. Five implants in three patients were lost during the healing period. Sixty-five prostheses were placed in 45 patients over the remaining 164 implants, 30 single crowns, 21 partially fixed bridges, 9 overdentures, and 5 full-arch fixed rehabilitations. A total of 12 implants were lost during the follow-up period. Mean marginal bone loss was 1.91 ± 1.24 mm, ranging from 1.1 to 3.6 mm. The most frequent complication was prosthetic technical complications (14.2%), followed by peri-implantitis (10.6%). The mean follow-up was of 214.4 months (208–228 months). Prosthodontic rehabilitation with an early-loading protocol over acid-etched surface implants is a successful implant treatment.

          Related collections

          Most cited references41

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Surface Modifications and Their Effects on Titanium Dental Implants

          This review covers several basic methodologies of surface treatment and their effects on titanium (Ti) implants. The importance of each treatment and its effects will be discussed in detail in order to compare their effectiveness in promoting osseointegration. Published literature for the last 18 years was selected with the use of keywords like titanium dental implant, surface roughness, coating, and osseointegration. Significant surface roughness played an important role in providing effective surface for bone implant contact, cell proliferation, and removal torque, despite having good mechanical properties. Overall, published studies indicated that an acid etched surface-modified and a coating application on commercial pure titanium implant was most preferable in producing the good surface roughness. Thus, a combination of a good surface roughness and mechanical properties of titanium could lead to successful dental implants.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Surface characteristics of dental implants: A review.

            During the last decades, several changes of paradigm have modified our view on how biomaterials' surface characteristics influence the bioresponse. After becoming aware of the role of a certain microroughness for improved cellular contact and osseointegration of dental titanium implants, the likewise important role of surface energy and wettability was increasingly strengthened. Very recently, synergistic effects of nanoscaled topographical features and hydrophilicity at the implant/bone interface have been reported.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Oral implant surfaces: Part 1--review focusing on topographic and chemical properties of different surfaces and in vivo responses to them.

              This article reviews the topographic and chemical properties of different oral implant surfaces and in vivo responses to them. The article considers detailed mechanical, topographic, and physical characteristics of implant surfaces. Anchorage mechanisms such as biomechanical and biochemical bonding are examined. Osteoattraction and doped surfaces are discussed. Surface quality of an oral implant may be subdivided into mechanical, topographic, and physicochemical properties. Topographic properties are evaluated at the micrometer level of resolution. Moderately rough surfaces (Sa between 1.0 and 2.0 microm) show stronger bone responses than smoother or rougher surfaces. The majority of currently marketed implants are moderately rough. Oral implants permit bone ingrowth into minor surface irregularities-biomechanical bonding or osseointegration. Additional biochemical bonding seems possible with certain surfaces. Osteoattraction is a commercial term without precise biologic correspondence. Surfaces doped with biochemical agents such as bone growth factors have been developed. Moderately roughened surfaces seem to have some clinical advantages over smoother or rougher surfaces, but the differences are small and often not statistically significant. Bioactive implants may offer some promise.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Materials (Basel)
                Materials (Basel)
                materials
                Materials
                MDPI
                1996-1944
                27 March 2020
                April 2020
                : 13
                : 7
                : 1553
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Comprehensive Dentistry for Adults and Gerodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Seville, Calle San Fernando, 4, 41004 Sevilla, Spain; evelasco@ 123456us.es (E.V.-O.); alopajanosas@ 123456hotmail.com (A.J.-G.); lomonsalve@ 123456hotmail.es (L.M.-G.); ivanortizgarcia1000@ 123456hotmail.com (I.O.-G.)
                [2 ]School of Dentistry, University of Murcia, Marques de los Velez, s/n, 30008 Murcia, Spain
                [3 ]Faculty of Dentistry, University of Seville, Calle San Fernando, 4, 41004 Sevilla, Spain; segurajj@ 123456us.es
                [4 ]Faculty of Dentistry, Medical-Surgical Area of Dentistry Hospital, University of Barcelona, Gran Via de les Corts Catalanes, 585, 08007 Barcelona, Spain; jl.lopez@ 123456ub.edu
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: ainicolas@ 123456um.es ; Tel.: +34-96824-7946
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6679-9431
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0427-9059
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8035-4412
                Article
                materials-13-01553
                10.3390/ma13071553
                7177283
                32230917
                98310edb-7a2f-42ab-8fa5-35b8bf49048d
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 09 March 2020
                : 26 March 2020
                Categories
                Article

                implant dentistry,acid-etched surface,early loading,osseointegration,long-term evaluation

                Comments

                Comment on this article