Research

Osseointegration of zirconia implants compared with titanium: an in vivo study

Rita Depprich¹ , Holger Zipprich² , Michelle Ommerborn³ , Christian Naujoks^1* , Hans-Peter Wiesmann⁴ , Sirichai Kiattavorncharoen⁵ , Hans-Christoph Lauer² , Ulrich Meyer¹ , Norbert R Kübler^1* and Jörg Handschel¹

¹  Department of Cranio- and Maxillofacial Surgery, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany

²  Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Section of Materials Sciences, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany

³  Department of Operative and Preventive Dentistry and Endodontics, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany

⁴  Department of Cranio- and Maxillofacial Surgery, Westfalian Wilhelms-University, Münster, Germany

⁵  Department of Oral and Maxillo-Facial Surgery, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand

author email corresponding author email* Contributed equally

Head & Face Medicine 2008, 4:30doi:10.1186/1746-160X-4-30

Published:	11 December 2008

Abstract

Background

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.