IADR Abstract Archives
Electrochemical Characterization of Seven Commercial Dental Implants.
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to comparative evaluate the electrochemical properties of Ti dental implants.
Methods: Seven commercially available dental implants (Ice/ICE, IMZ TPS /IMZ, Ospol/OSP, Osseotite Full/OST, Replace Select/RPL, SLA Active/SLA and Semados SM /SMD) with different surface texture and composition were included in this study. Three specimens per implant were tested in a Ringer’s solution (8.6 g NaCl, 0.33 g CaCl2 2H2O, 0.3 g KCl, in 1000 ml distilled water), employing a mini corrosion cell system setup, with a saturated calomel reference electrode and a 0.008cm2 cross-sectional area. Two anodic scan curves were recorded for each implant (-1.0V up to 2.0 V and backwards to zero potential) and were determined from each curve. The results were statistically analysed by one way ANOVA and Tukey-Kramer multiple comparison test (α=0.05).
Results: Significant differences (p<0.05) were found in the electrochemical properties tested, with the implants classified in the following order (best to worst) Ecorr: IMZ,OSP,SLA>RPS>SMD>OTF,ICE; Epit: OSP>RPS>SMD>ICE,IMZ,OTF>SLA. All curves showed negative hysteresis, denoting that the passive film can be reformed in reverse scanning.
Conclusions: The different surface texture and elemental composition of implant surfaces introduced to enhance osseointegration, significantly modify the corrosion resistance of the implants, which may affect their clinical performance.
Methods: Seven commercially available dental implants (Ice/ICE, IMZ TPS /IMZ, Ospol/OSP, Osseotite Full/OST, Replace Select/RPL, SLA Active/SLA and Semados SM /SMD) with different surface texture and composition were included in this study. Three specimens per implant were tested in a Ringer’s solution (8.6 g NaCl, 0.33 g CaCl2 2H2O, 0.3 g KCl, in 1000 ml distilled water), employing a mini corrosion cell system setup, with a saturated calomel reference electrode and a 0.008cm2 cross-sectional area. Two anodic scan curves were recorded for each implant (-1.0V up to 2.0 V and backwards to zero potential) and were determined from each curve. The results were statistically analysed by one way ANOVA and Tukey-Kramer multiple comparison test (α=0.05).
Results: Significant differences (p<0.05) were found in the electrochemical properties tested, with the implants classified in the following order (best to worst) Ecorr: IMZ,OSP,SLA>RPS>SMD>OTF,ICE; Epit: OSP>RPS>SMD>ICE,IMZ,OTF>SLA. All curves showed negative hysteresis, denoting that the passive film can be reformed in reverse scanning.
Conclusions: The different surface texture and elemental composition of implant surfaces introduced to enhance osseointegration, significantly modify the corrosion resistance of the implants, which may affect their clinical performance.