Publication:
Osseointegration of zirconia implants compared with titanium: An in vivo study

dc.contributor.authorRita Depprichen_US
dc.contributor.authorHolger Zipprichen_US
dc.contributor.authorMichelle Ommerbornen_US
dc.contributor.authorChristian Naujoksen_US
dc.contributor.authorHans Peter Wiesmannen_US
dc.contributor.authorSirichai Kiattavorncharoenen_US
dc.contributor.authorHans Christoph Laueren_US
dc.contributor.authorUlrich Meyeren_US
dc.contributor.authorNorbert R. Kübleren_US
dc.contributor.authorJörg Handschelen_US
dc.contributor.otherHeinrich Heine Universitaten_US
dc.contributor.otherGoethe-Universitat Frankfurt am Mainen_US
dc.contributor.otherWestfalische Wilhelms-Universitat Munsteren_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-07-12T02:25:16Z
dc.date.available2018-07-12T02:25:16Z
dc.date.issued2008-12-01en_US
dc.description.abstractBackground. Titanium and titanium alloys are widely used for fabrication of dental implants. Since the material composition and the surface topography of a biomaterial play a fundamental role in osseointegration, various chemical and physical surface modifications have been developed to improve osseous healing. Zirconia-based implants were introduced into dental implantology as an altenative to titanium implants. Zirconia seems to be a suitable implant material because of its tooth-like colour, its mechanical properties and its biocompatibility. As the osseointegration of zirconia implants has not been extensively investigated, the aim of this study was to compare the osseous healing of zirconia implants with titanium implants which have a roughened surface but otherwise similar implant geometries. Methods. Forty-eight zirconia and titanium implants were introduced into the tibia of 12 minipigs. After 1, 4 or 12 weeks, animals were sacrificed and specimens containing the implants were examined in terms of histological and ultrastructural techniques. Results. Histological results showed direct bone contact on the zirconia and titanium surfaces. Bone implant contact as measured by histomorphometry was slightly better on titanium than on zirconia surfaces. However, a statistically significant difference between the two groups was not observed. Conclusion. The results demonstrated that zirconia implants with modified surfaces result in an osseointegration which is comparable with that of titanium implants. © 2008 Depprich et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.en_US
dc.identifier.citationHead and Face Medicine. Vol.4, No.1 (2008)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/1746-160X-4-30en_US
dc.identifier.issn1746160Xen_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-58149310756en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/19156
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=58149310756&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectDentistryen_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleOsseointegration of zirconia implants compared with titanium: An in vivo studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=58149310756&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections