Surface Treatments for Dental Implants: References and Comparisons?

Last Updated: Mar 22, 2010

Dr. VR asks:

I would like to learn more about the effect of various surface treatments on the implant fixture. There are over one hundred companies producing implants and there are many different kinds of surface treatments. I would like to be able to compare the various surface treatments to determine which are the most effective. Can you recommend some excellent references in the peer reviewed literature? More importantly, what are your experiences in real world dentistry? I would like to get some feedback from those of you who have had very positive or negative experiences.

2 Comments on Surface Treatments for Dental Implants: References and Comparisons?

Comments Closed

New comments are currently closed for this post.

Paul

03/28/2010

Moderately roughened implants have the longest track record. Astra's fluoride-modified and Straumann's sla-active show some improvement upon the more conventional blasted titanium which may allow you to load them a bit earlier. From what I've read, Nobel's tiunite is lacking. A moderately rough, tapered, bone level implant with a medialized abutment is what I prefer. Astra's and Straumann's chemical modifications are nice but not worth the extra $$ to me. The majority of my patients would rather wait 1 more month to load and save a few hundred. Until they introduce implants with BMP or similar that stimulate new bone growth, it will be hard to beat a threaded, moderately roughened titanium screw, imo.

Carlos Boudet, DDS

05/06/2010

Dr VR You may want to email the Intra-lock company for references and literature on their "Ossean" surface. However, most reputable companies today have very adequate treatment of their implant surfaces.

« surgery with patient on brilinta supracrestal implants indications »