Liu Ruohong, Lei Tianhua, Dusevich Vladimir, Yao Xiamei, Liu Ying, Walker Mary P, Wang Yong, Ye Ling
Department of Restorative Dentistry, University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Dentistry, Kansas City, MO.
J Prosthodont. 2013 Dec;22(8):641-51. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12063. Epub 2013 May 31.
The aims of this study were to compare surface properties of four commercial dental implants and to compare those implant systems' cell adhesion, which may be affected by the surface properties, and to provide scientific information on the selection of implants for clinicians.
The surface properties of four commonly used dental implants (3i Nanotite™, Astra OsseoSpeed™, Nobel Biocare TiUnite®, and Straumann SLActive®) were studied using MicroSpy profiler, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, and Raman microspectroscopy. Primary mouse alveolar bone cells were cultured on the surface of implants from the four companies. After 48-hour culture, SEM in combination with a quantitative analysis of SEM images was used to examine the cell adhesion. Cell adhesion rates (ratios of cell surface to implant surface) among different systems were compared.
Distinct differences were found among these implants. Comparisons of roughness among three locations: flank, top, and valley within the same implant system, or in the same location among different implants were made. Generally Astra and Straumann systems showed the roughest surface, whereas 3i showed the smoothest surface. Multiple cracks were found on the surface of the Nobel Biocare system, which also had a dramatically lower level of titanium. In addition, rutile phase of titanium oxide was found in 3i, Astra, and Straumann systems, and anatase phase of titanium oxide was only detected in the Nobel Biocare system. After 48-hour culture, Astra and Straumann systems displayed the highest cell adhesion at the areas of flank, top, and valley of the implant surface. Primary cells also reached confluence on the valley, but significantly less in the 3i system. Nobel Biocare showed the least cell adhesion on the flank and valley.
Implant systems have distinct differences in surface properties, leading to different cell adhesion results. Further in vivo study is needed to study the impact of the surface characteristics and different cell adhesion on the osseointegration between implant and bone.
本研究旨在比较四种商用牙科种植体的表面特性，比较这些种植体系统的细胞黏附情况（其可能受表面特性影响），并为临床医生在种植体选择方面提供科学信息。
使用MicroSpy轮廓仪、扫描电子显微镜（SEM）、能量色散X射线光谱仪和拉曼显微光谱仪研究四种常用牙科种植体（3i Nanotite™、Astra OsseoSpeed™、Nobel Biocare TiUnite®和Straumann SLActive®）的表面特性。将原代小鼠牙槽骨细胞培养在这四家公司的种植体表面。培养48小时后，使用SEM结合SEM图像定量分析来检查细胞黏附情况。比较不同系统之间的细胞黏附率（细胞表面与种植体表面的比率）。
这些种植体之间存在明显差异。对同一种植体系统内的三个位置（侧面、顶部和谷底）或不同种植体的相同位置的粗糙度进行了比较。一般来说，Astra和Straumann系统的表面最粗糙，而3i系统的表面最光滑。在Nobel Biocare系统的表面发现了多条裂纹，其钛含量也显著较低。此外，在3i、Astra和Straumann系统中发现了二氧化钛的金红石相，而仅在Nobel Biocare系统中检测到了二氧化钛的锐钛矿相。培养48小时后，Astra和Straumann系统在种植体表面的侧面、顶部和谷底区域显示出最高的细胞黏附。原代细胞在谷底也达到了汇合，但在3i系统中明显较少。Nobel Biocare在侧面和谷底的细胞黏附最少。
种植体系统在表面特性上存在明显差异，导致不同的细胞黏附结果。需要进一步进行体内研究，以研究表面特性和不同细胞黏附对种植体与骨之间骨结合的影响。
