Comparison of surface aspects of turned and anodized titanium dental implant, or abutment material for an optimal soft tissue integration

Attila Mühl; Péter Szabó; Olga Krafcsik; Zoltán Aigner; Judit Kopniczky; Ákos Nagy; Gyula Marada; Kinga Turzó

doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10263

Comparison of surface aspects of turned and anodized titanium dental implant, or abutment material for an optimal soft tissue integration

Heliyon. 2022 Aug 15;8(8):e10263. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10263. eCollection 2022 Aug.

Authors

Attila Mühl¹, Péter Szabó², Olga Krafcsik³, Zoltán Aigner⁴, Judit Kopniczky⁵, Ákos Nagy⁶, Gyula Marada⁶, Kinga Turzó⁶

Affiliations

¹ Private Dental Office, H-7300 Pécsi út 1., Komló, Hungary.
² Szentágothai Research Center, Environmental Analytical and Geoanalytical Research Group, Ifjúság útja 20., H-7624, Pécs, Hungary.
³ Department of Atomic Physics, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budafoki út 8., H-1111, Budapest, Hungary.
⁴ Institute of Pharmaceutical Technology and Regulatory Affairs, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Szeged, Zrínyi u. 9., H-6720, Szeged, Hungary.
⁵ Department of Optics and Quantum Electronics, University of Szeged, Dóm tér 9., H-6720, Szeged, Hungary.
⁶ Dental School, Medical Faculty, University of Pécs, Dischka Gy. u. 5., H-7621, Pécs, Hungary.

Abstract

Objectives: Soft tissue integration of dental implants lags behind natural biological integration of teeth mainly because of non-optimal surface features. Peri-implant infections resulting in loss of supporting bone jeopardize the success of implants. Our aim was to compare an anodized surface design with a turned one for a more optimal surface.

Methods: Morphological and chemical structures of turned and anodized Ti surfaces (grade 5: Ti6Al4V) discs were examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM-EDS), energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS), and atomic force microscopy (AFM). The hydrophilic or hydrophobic features of the surfaces were determined by dynamic contact angle measurement.

Results: SEM and AFM revealed significant differences in the morphology and roughness (R_a) of the samples. Anodized discs presented a granular structure, while turned ones had circular grooves. The roughness was significantly higher for the anodized samples compared to the turned ones. XPS and EDS confirmed typical elements for both Ti6Al4V samples. Due to anodization, the amount of Ti (IV) had increased and Ti (III) had decreased in the thicker oxide layer. Anodized samples resulted in a more hydrophilic surface than the turned ones.

Significance: The results suggest that the tested anodized samples present optimal surface characteristics to be used as abutment material for an optimal soft tissue integration.

Keywords: Anodization; Chemical composition; Contact angle; Gingival attachment; Roughness; Titanium dental implant; Turned surface.