Comparison of Zirconia Implant Surface Modifications for Optimal Osseointegration

Abstract

Zirconia ceramic implants are commercially available from a rapidly growing number of manufacturers. Macroscopic and microscopic surface design and characteristics are considered to be key determining factors in the success of the osseointegration process. It is, therefore, crucial to assess which surface modification promotes the most favorable biological response. The purpose of this study was to conduct a comparison of modern surface modifications that are featured in the most common commercially available zirconia ceramic implant systems. A review of the currently available literature on zirconia implant surface topography and the associated bio-physical factors was conducted, with a focus on the osseointegration of zirconia surfaces. After a review of the selected articles for this study, commercially available zirconia implant surfaces were all modified using subtractive protocols. Commercially available ceramic implant surfaces were modified or enhanced using sandblasting, acid etching, laser etching, or combinations of the aforementioned. From our literature review, laser-modified surfaces emerged as the ones with the highest surface roughness and bone–implant contact (BIC). It was also found that surface roughness could be controlled to achieve optimal roughness by modifying the laser output power during manufacturing. Furthermore, laser surface modification induced a very low amount of preload microcracks in the zirconia. Osteopontin (OPN), an early–late osteogenic differentiation marker, was significantly upregulated in laser-treated surfaces. Moreover, surface wettability was highest in laser-treated surfaces, indicating favorable hydrophilicity and thus promoting early bone forming, cell adhesion, and subsequent maturation. Sandblasting followed by laser modification and sandblasting followed by acid etching and post-milling heat treatment (SE-H) surfaces featured comparable results, with favorable biological responses around zirconia implants.

Keywords

• zirconia implant
• ceramic implant
• dental implant
• implant surface
• implant design
• osseointegration