Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Materialographic Examination of Three Different Types of Failed Dental Implants

  • , , , , , , and
Published/Copyright: February 15, 2014
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Submit Manuscript Author Information
Practical Metallography
From the journal Practical Metallography Volume 51 Issue 2

Abstract

Focused on tissue interactions and the properties of the materials themselves, the causes of dental implant failure can be analysed successfully using methods developed within materials science. This will be exemplified by three failing implants. The implants represent a broad range of materials (titanium, PEEK, zirconium dioxide) and geometries (screw, cylindrical, disc).

Materials and methods: Following appropriate specimen collection and preparation, EDX, ESEM, light microscopy and ultrasound examinations were performed. Since only the titanium implant exhibited osseointegration, the implant-bone interface of this implant was additionally analysed by FIB-TEM.

Results: The absence of bone tissue residue on the zirconium dioxide and PEEK implants was confirmed by all imaging methods. Complete osseointegration is demonstrable only for a complete fragment of the titanium implant resected from the jaw bone, with a bone-to-metal contact of 82.5 %.

Conclusion: A bioactive interaction with the target tissues was found only for the titanium implant. The loss of the titanium implant examined was due to a material failure. High-frequency ultrasonic microscopy has proven a suitable tool for the assessment of osseointegration. A reduced sample preparation effort and an ability to use ultrasound in situ would suggest that ultrasonic microscopy technology is a suitable technology for failure analysis.

Kurzfassung

Die Ursachen des Versagens dentaler Implantate können im Hinblick auf Gewebeinteraktionen und die Eigenschaften der Materialien selbst anhand von in den Materialwissenschaften entwickelten Verfahren erfolgreich untersucht werden. Beispielhaft wird dies an drei versagenden Implantaten gezeigt. Die Implantate repräsentieren sowohl ein breites Spektrum an Materialien (Titan, PEEK, Zirconiumdioxid) als auch an Geometrien (Schraub-, Zylinder-, Diskimplantat).

Materialien und Verfahren: Nach entsprechender Probengewinnung und -präparation wurden EDX-, ESEM-, lichtmikroskopische und Ultraschalluntersuchungen durchgeführt. Da lediglich das Titanimplantat eine Osseointegration aufwies, wurde bei diesem Implantat die Grenzfläche Implantat/Knochen zusätzlich mittels FIB-TEM untersucht.

Ergebnisse: Die Abwesenheit von Knochengeweberesten auf den Zirconiumdioxid- und PEEK-Implantaten konnte mit allen bildgebenden Verfahren bestätigt werden. Lediglich beim Titanimplantat ist eine vollständige Osseointegration an einem aus dem Kieferknochen resezierten vollständigen Fragment mit einem Kontakt Knochen/Metall (Bone-Metall-Contact, BMC) von 82,5 % nachweisbar.

Schlussfolgerung: Eine bioaktive Interaktion mit den Zielgeweben ist nur beim Titanimplantat festzustellen. Der Verlust des hier untersuchten Titanimplantats ist auf Materialversagen zurückzuführen. Für die Beurteilung der Osseointegration hat sich die Hochfrequenzultraschallmikroskopie als geeignetes Instrument erwiesen. Der geringere Aufwand bei der Probenvorbereitung sowie die Möglichkeit, Ultraschall in situ einsetzen zu können, legt die Ultraschallmikroskopie als geeignete Technologie zur Schadensanalyse nahe.

Übersetzung: E. Engert

References / Literatur

[1] Buser, D.; Mericske-Stern, R.; Bernard, J.P.; Behneke, A.; Behneke, N.; Hirt, H.P. et al.: Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997;8: 161–72. 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080302.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[2] Norowski, P.Jr.; Bumgardner, J.D.: Biomaterial and antibiotic strategies for peri-implantitis: a review. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2009;88: 530–43. 10.1002/jbm.b.31152Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[3] Pompa, G.; Castiglione, E.; Quaranta, M.: [Failures and surgical complications in oral implants. Follow-up of 327 osseointegrated implants]. Minerva Stomatol. 1999;48: 585–90.Search in Google Scholar

[4] Esposito, M.; Hirsch, J.M.; Lekholm, U.; Thomsen, P.: Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. (II). Etiopathogenesis. Eur J Oral Sci. 1998;106: 721–64. 10.1046/j.0909-8836.t01-6-.xSearch in Google Scholar

[5] Esposito, M.; Hirsch, J.M.; Lekholm, U.; Thomsen, P.: Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. (I). Success criteria and epidemiology. Eur J Oral Sci. 1998;106: 527–51. 10.1046/j.0909-8836.t01-2-.xSearch in Google Scholar

[6] Kopp, S.; Kuzelka, J.; Goldmann, T.; Himmlova, L.; Ihde, S.: Modeling of load transmission and distribution of deformation energy before and after healing of basal dental implants in the human mandible. Biomed Tech (Berl). 2011;56: 53–8. 10.1515/bmt.2010.053Search in Google Scholar

[7] Rupp, F.; Scheideler, L.; Eichler, M.; Geis-Gerstorfer, J.: Wetting behavior of dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26: 1256–66.Search in Google Scholar

[8] Rupp, F.; Scheideler, L.; Rehbein, D.; Axmann, D.; Geis-Gerstorfer, J.: Roughness induced dynamic changes of wettability of acid etched titanium implant modifications. Biomaterials. 2004;25: 1429–38. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.08.015Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[9] Schwarz, F.: Wieland, M.; Schwartz, Z.; Zhao, G.; Rupp, F.; Geis-Gerstorfer, J. et al.: Potential of chemically modified hydrophilic surface characteristics to support tissue integration of titanium dental implants. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2009;88: 544–57. 10.1002/jbm.b.31233Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[10] Zhao, G.; Schwartz, Z.; Wieland, M.; Rupp, F.; Geis-Gerstorfer, J.; Cochran, D.L. et al.: High surface energy enhances cell response to titanium substrate microstructure. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2005;74: 49–58. 10.1002/jbm.a.30320Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[11] Braceras, I.; Ipinazar, E.; De Maeztu, M.A.; Alava, J.I.: Risk analysis and implants. Med Eng Phys. 2008;30: 1201–4. 10.1016/j.medengphy.2008.04.001Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[12] Kopp, S.: Sterile Osteolysen? – Klinik und FEA im MKG-Bereich. Osteologie. 2010;19:19.Search in Google Scholar

[13] Olmedo, D.G.; Tasat, D.R.; Duffo, G.; Guglielmotti, M.B.; Cabrini, R.L.: The issue of corrosion in dental implants: a review. Acta Odontol Latinoam. 2009;22: 3–9.Search in Google Scholar

[14] Nilius, M.; Nilus, M.; Goeken, R.; Kanzler, K.; Nader, A.; Zahn, A.: Keramikimplantate im zahnlosen Oberkiefer – Alternative bei multipler Unverträglichkeit?Implantologie Journal2008;3: 20–9.Search in Google Scholar

[15] Behrend, D.; Warkentin, M.; Specht, O.; Schmidt, W.; Rosentritt, M.; Ottl, P.: Materialographical Investigations of Dental Materials. Practical Metallography2011;48: 1–9.10.3139/147.110115Search in Google Scholar

[16] Zinelis, S.; Thomas, A.; Syres, K.; Silikas, N.; Eliades, G.: Surface characterization of zirconia dental implants. Dent Mater. 2010;26: 295–305. 10.1016/j.dental.2009.11.079Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[17] Yamano, S.; Al-Sowygh, Z.H.; Gallucci, G.O.; Wada, K.; Weber, H.P.; Sukotjo, C.: Early peri-implant tissue reactions on different titanium surface topographies. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22: 815–9. 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02059.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[18] Salihoglu, U.; Boynuegri, D.; Engin, D.; Duman, A.N.; Gokalp, P.; Balos, K.: Bacterial adhesion and colonization differences between zirconium oxide and titanium alloys: an in vivo human study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26: 101–7.Search in Google Scholar

[19] Shin, D.; Blanchard, S.B.; Ito, M.; Chu, T.M.: Peripheral quantitative computer tomographic, histomorphometric, and removal torque analyses of two different non-coated implants in a rabbit model. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22: 242–50. 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01980.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[20] Kopp, S.; Warkentin, M.; Öri, F.; Ottl, P.; Kundt, G.; Frerich, B.: Section plane selection influences the results of histomorphometric studies: the example of dental implants. Biomed Tech (Berl). 2012.10.1515/bmt-2012-0015Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[21] Moller, B.; Terheyden, H.; Acil, Y.; Purcz, N.M.; Hertrampf, K.; Tabakov, A. et al.: A comparison of biocompatibility and osseointegration of ceramic and titanium implants: an in vivo and in vitro study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;41: 638–45. 10.1016/j.ijom.2012.02.004Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[22] Gahlert, M.; Roehling, S.; Sprecher, C.M.; Kniha, H.; Milz, S.; Bormann, K.: In vivo performance of zirconia and titanium implants: a histomorphometric study in mini pig maxillae. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23: 281–6. 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02157.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[23] Borgonovo, A.E.; Arnaboldi, O.; Censi, R.; Dolci, M.; Santoro, G.: Edentulous jaws rehabilitation with yttrium-stabilized zirconium dioxide implants: two years follow-up experience. Minerva Stomatol. 2010;59: 381–92.Search in Google Scholar

[24] Pjetursson, B.E.; Lang, N.P.: Prosthetic treatment planning on the basis of scientific evidence. J Oral Rehabil. 2008;35Suppl 1:72–9. 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2007.01824.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[25] Kurtz, S.M.; Devine, J.N.: PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials. 2007;28: 4845–69. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.07.013Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[26] Wu, X.; Liu, X.; Wei, J.; Ma, J.; Deng, F.; Wei, S.: Nano-TiO2/PEEK bioactive composite as a bone substitute material: in vitro and in vivo studies. Int J Nanomedicine. 2012;7: 1215–25.Search in Google Scholar

[27] Xin, H.; Duncan, E.T.; Shepherd, K.; Dearn, D.: The tribological performance of Poly-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK) in cervical disc arthroplasty WBC2012. Chengdu2012. p. 191.Search in Google Scholar

[28] Briem, D.; Strametz, S.; Schroder, K.; Meenen, N.M.; Lehmann, W.; Linhart, W. et al.: Response of primary fibroblasts and osteoblasts to plasma treated polyetheretherketone (PEEK) surfaces. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2005;16: 671–7. 10.1007/s10856-005-2539-zSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[29] Cook, S.D.; Rust-Dawicki, A.M.: Preliminary evaluation of titanium-coated PEEK dental implants. J Oral Implantol. 1995;21: 176–81.Search in Google Scholar

[30] Cheol-Min, H.; Hyoun-Ee, K.; Young-Hag, K.; Jun-Hyeog, J.: Impregnation of BMP-2 on PEEK by formation of nano-porous anodized titanium oxid layer. WBC2012. Chengdu 2012.Search in Google Scholar

[31] Keuer, H., Ganz, C.; Xu, W.; Schubert, A.; Frerich, B.: Osseoinductive coating on PEEK surfaces by using nanocristalline biomaterial. WBC2012. Chengdu 2012.10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.529-530.345Search in Google Scholar

[32] Kjellin, P.; Andersson, M.; Barkarmo, S.; Handa, P.; Stenport, V.; WennenbergA.: Improving osseointegration of PEEK implants with nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite. WBC2012. Chengdu 2012.Search in Google Scholar

[33] Jarman-Smith, M.; Brady, M.; Jaekel, D.; Kurtz, S.: Characterisation of an Interconnected Porous PEEK Biomaterial with Porosity Suitable for Osseoconductivity. WBC2012. Chengdu 2012.Search in Google Scholar

[34] Hainan, G.: Biomimetic Nanofiber Array on PEEK for enhanced Osteoblast Adhesion. WBC2012. Chengdu 2012.Search in Google Scholar

[35] Thissen, H.; Pasic, P.; Johnson, G.; Bean, P.; McLean, K.; Poggie, R.: Surface modified PEEK for bone-contacting applications. WBC2012. Chengdu 2012.Search in Google Scholar

[36] Lee, S.; Goh, B.T.; Lai, S.H.; Tideman, H.; Stoelinga, P.J.; Jansen, J.A.: Peri-implant and systemic release of metallic elements following insertion of a mandibular modular endoprosthesis in Macaca fascicularis. Acta Biomater. 2009;5: 3640–6. 10.1016/j.actbio.2009.05.028Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[37] Kelly, J.; Lin, A.; Wang, C.J.; Park, S.; Nishimura, I.: Vitamin D and bone physiology: demonstration of vitamin D deficiency in an implant osseointegration rat model. J Prosthodont. 2009;18: 473–8.10.1111/j.1532-849X.2009.00446.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

Published Online: 2014-02-15
Published in Print: 2014-02-17

© 2014, Carl Hanser Verlag, München

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Contents/Inhalt
  2. Contents
  3. Editorial
  4. Editorial
  5. Technical Contributions/Fachbeiträge
  6. Stereological Analysis of the Microstructural Inhomogeneities in Direct-Chill Cast and Continuous-Cast Aluminium-Magnesium Alloy (AA5754)
  7. The Investigation and Growth Kinetics of TiC Coatings on AISI D3 Steel Produced by Thermo-Reactive Diffusion Technique
  8. Microstructures of Cast Fe-Mn-Si-Cr-Ni Shape Memory Alloys Characterized by Metallography
  9. Materialographic Examination of Three Different Types of Failed Dental Implants
  10. Meeting Diary/Veranstaltungskalender
  11. Meeting Diary
https://doi.org/10.3139/147.110223

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Contents/Inhalt
  2. Contents
  3. Editorial
  4. Editorial
  5. Technical Contributions/Fachbeiträge
  6. Stereological Analysis of the Microstructural Inhomogeneities in Direct-Chill Cast and Continuous-Cast Aluminium-Magnesium Alloy (AA5754)
  7. The Investigation and Growth Kinetics of TiC Coatings on AISI D3 Steel Produced by Thermo-Reactive Diffusion Technique
  8. Microstructures of Cast Fe-Mn-Si-Cr-Ni Shape Memory Alloys Characterized by Metallography
  9. Materialographic Examination of Three Different Types of Failed Dental Implants
  10. Meeting Diary/Veranstaltungskalender
  11. Meeting Diary
Downloaded on 15.4.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.3139/147.110223/html
Scroll to top button