Titanium implant surface modification by cathodic reduction in hydrofluoric acid: Surface characterization and in vivo performance

2008 ◽  
Vol 88A (3) ◽  
pp. 581-588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sébastien F. Lamolle ◽  
Marta Monjo ◽  
Ståle P. Lyngstadaas ◽  
Jan E. Ellingsen ◽  
Håvard J. Haugen
Keyword(s):  
Surface Modification ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Surface Characterization ◽  
Titanium Implant ◽  
Cathodic Reduction ◽  
Implant Surface ◽  
Titanium Implant Surface

scholarly journals New titanium implant surface – An in vitro and in vivo evaluation

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (S19) ◽  
pp. 213-213
Author(s):  
Sergio Gehrke ◽  
Leticia Pèrez‐DÌaz ◽  
Patricia Mazon ◽  
Piedad N. de Aza
Keyword(s):  
Titanium Implant ◽  
Implant Surface ◽  
In Vivo Evaluation ◽  
Titanium Implant Surface

Does surface anodisation of titanium implants change osseointegration and make their extraction from bone any easier?

2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (03) ◽  
pp. 202-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Langhoff ◽  
J. Mayer ◽  
L. Faber ◽  
S. Kaestner ◽  
G. Guibert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Titanium Implant ◽  
Titanium Implants ◽  
Implant Surface ◽  
Bone Implant ◽  
High Bone ◽  
Titanium Surfaces ◽  
Anodized Titanium ◽  
Titanium Implant Surface

Summary Objectives: Titanium implants have a tendency for high bone-implant bonding, and, in comparison to stainless steel implants are more difficult to remove. The current study was carried out to evaluate, i) the release strength of three selected anodized titanium surfaces with increased nanohardness and low roughness, and ii) bone-implant bonding in vivo. These modified surfaces were intended to give improved anchorage while facilitating easier removal of temporary implants. Material and methods: The new surfaces were referenced to a stainless steel implant and a standard titanium implant surface (TiMAX™). In a sheep limb model, healing period was 3 months. Bone-implant bonding was evaluated either biomechanically or histologically. Results: The new surface anodized screws demonstrated similar or slightly higher bone-implantcontact (BIC) and torque release forces than the titanium reference. The BIC of the stainless steel implants was significant lower than two of the anodized surfaces (p=0.04), but differences between stainless steel and all titanium implants in torque release forces were not significant (p=0.06). Conclusion: The new anodized titanium surfaces showed good bone-implant bonding despite a smooth surface and increased nanohardness. However, they failed to facilitate implant removal at 3 months.

scholarly journals The Affinity of Human Fetal Osteoblast to Laser-Modified Titanium Implant Fixtures

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee Kian Khoo ◽  
Sirichai Kiattavorncharoen ◽  
Verasak Pairuchvej ◽  
Nisanat Lakkhanachatpan ◽  
Natthamet Wongsirichat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surface Modification ◽  
Cell Adhesion ◽  
Surface Chemistry ◽  
Titanium Implant ◽  
Surface Characteristics ◽  
Titanium Implants ◽  
Cell Maturation ◽  
Implant Surface ◽  
Pure Grade

Introduction: Implant surface modification methods have recently involved laser treatment to achieve the desired implant surface characteristics. Meanwhile, surface modification could potentially introduce foreign elements to the implant surface during the manufacturing process. Objectives: The study aimed to investigate the surface chemistry and topography of commercially available laser-modified titanium implants, together with evaluating the cell morphology and cell adhesion of human fetal osteoblast (hFOB) seeded onto the same implants. Method: Six (6) samples of commercially available laser-modified titanium implants were investigated. These implants were manufactured by two different companies. Three (3) implants were made from commercially pure grade 4 Titanium (Brand X); and three were made from grade 5 Ti6Al4V (Brand Y). The surface topography of these implants was analyzed by scanning electron microscope (SEM) and the surface chemistry was evaluated with electron dispersive x-ray spectroscopy(EDS). Human fetal osteoblasts were seeded onto the implant fixtures to investigate the biocompatibility and adhesion. Results & Discussion: Brand X displayed dark areas under SEM while it was rarely found on brand Y. These dark areas were consistent with their organic matter. The hFOB cell experiments revealed cell adhesion with filopodia on Brand X samples which is consistent with cell maturation. The cells on Brand Y were morphologically round and lacked projections, one sample was devoid of any noticeable cells under SEM. Cell adhesion was observed early at 48 hrs in laser-irradiated titanium fixtures from both the brands. Conclusion: The presence of organic impurities in Brand X should not be overlooked because disruption of the osseointegration process may occur due to the rejection of the biomaterial in an in-vivo model. Nevertheless, there was insufficient evidence to link implant failure directly with carbon contaminated implant surfaces. Further studies to determine the toxicity of Vanadium from Ti6Al4V in an in-vivo environment should indicate the reason for different cell maturation.

A novel titanium implant surface modification by plasma electrolytic oxidation (PEO) preventing tendon adhesion

2021 ◽  
Vol 123 ◽  
pp. 112030
Author(s):  
Mustafa Becerikli ◽  
Alexander Kopp ◽  
Nadja Kröger ◽  
Mariia Bodrova ◽  
Christoph Wallner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surface Modification ◽  
Plasma Electrolytic Oxidation ◽  
Titanium Implant ◽  
Implant Surface ◽  
Electrolytic Oxidation ◽  
Plasma Electrolytic ◽  
Titanium Implant Surface

Influence of roughness on in-vivo properties of titanium implant surface and their electrochemical behavior

2016 ◽  
Vol 302 ◽  
pp. 215-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shih Hsun Chen ◽  
Shi Chiou Ho ◽  
Chia Hao Chang ◽  
Chien Chon Chen ◽  
Wen Ching Say
Keyword(s):  
Electrochemical Behavior ◽  
Titanium Implant ◽  
Implant Surface ◽  
Titanium Implant Surface

In vitro and in vivo study of a sodium chloride impregnated microarc oxidation-treated titanium implant surface

2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (22) ◽  
pp. 3549 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaojing Wang ◽  
Guowei Wang ◽  
ShouQin Shan ◽  
Guangyan Hui ◽  
Tingkai Guo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sodium Chloride ◽  
Microarc Oxidation ◽  
Titanium Implant ◽  
In Vivo Study ◽  
Implant Surface ◽  
Titanium Implant Surface

Alkali-Modified Titanium Surface Stimulating Formation of Bone-Implant Interface

2007 ◽  
Vol 361-363 ◽  
pp. 749-752
Author(s):  
J. Strnad ◽  
Jan Macháček ◽  
Z. Strnad ◽  
C. Povýšil ◽  
Marie Strnadová
Keyword(s):  
Titanium Implant ◽  
Surface Characteristics ◽  
Healing Time ◽  
Machined Surface ◽  
Implant Surface ◽  
Bone Implant ◽  
Bone Response ◽  
Modified Surface ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Titanium Implant Surface

This study was carried out to assess the bone response to alkali-modified titanium implant surface (Bio surface), using histomorphometric investigation on an animal model. The mean net contribution of the Bio surface to the increase in bone implant contact (BIC) with reference to the turned, machined surface was evaluated at 7.94 % (BIC/week), within the first five weeks of healing. The contribution was expressed as the difference in the osseointegration rates ( BIC/'healing time) between the implants with alkali modified surface (Bio surface) and those with turned, machined surface. The surface characteristics that differed between the implant surfaces, i.e. surface morphology, specific surface area, contact angle, hydroxylation/hydration, may represent factors that influence the rate of osseointegration.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document