Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Fall;15(4):226-231.
doi: 10.34172/joddd.2021.037. Epub 2021 Dec 5.

Stability of dental implants with sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) and modified (SLActive) surfaces during the osseointegration period

Gulsum Sayin Ozel  1 , Ozgur Inan  2 , Asli Secilmis Acar  3 , Gamze Alniacik Iyidogan  4 , Dogan Dolanmaz  5 , Gulsun Yildirim  6
Affiliations

Stability of dental implants with sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) and modified (SLActive) surfaces during the osseointegration period

Gulsum Sayin Ozel et al. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2021 Fall.

Abstract

Background. The surface properties of implants are effective factors for increasing the osseointegration and activity of osteoprogenitor cells. This study compared the stability of dental implants with sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) and modified surfaces (SLActive) using the resonance frequency analysis (RFA). Methods. In a split-mouth design, 50 dental implants with either SLA surface properties (n=25) or modified (SLActive) surface properties (n=25) were placed in the mandibles of 12 patients with a bilateral posterior edentulous area. Implant stability was measured using RFA (Osstell) at implant placement time and every week for 1, 2, and 3 months before the conventional loading time. Results. One week following the implantation, implant stability increased from 70 to 77.67 for SLA and from 71.67 to 79 for SLActive (P < 0.05). Stability improved each week except in the 4th week in SLActive surface measurements. No significant differences were observed between the groups at 2 and 3 months (P > 0.05). Conclusions. For both implant surfaces, increased stability was observed over time, with no significant differences between the groups.

Keywords: Bone-implant interface; Dental implants; Osseointegration; Resonance frequency analysis; SLA; SLActive.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Oh JS, Kim SG. Clinical study of the relationship between implant stability measurements using Periotest and Osstell mentor and bone quality assessment. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012;113(3):e35–40. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.07.003. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ostman PO, Hellman M, Wendelhag I, Sennerby L. Resonance frequency analysis measurements of implants at placement surgery. Int J Prosthodont. 2006;19(1):77–83. - PubMed
    1. Naves MM, Menezes HH, Magalhães D, Ferreira JA, Ribeiro SF, de Mello JD. et al. Effect of macrogeometry on the surface topography of dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30(4):789–99. doi: 10.11607/jomi.3934. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Esposito M, Thomsen P, Ericson LE, Sennerby L, Lekholm U. Histopathologic observations on late oral implant failures. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2000;2(1):18–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00103.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Herrero-Climent M, Albertini M, Rios-Santos JV, Lázaro-Calvo P, Fernández-Palacín A, Bullon P. Resonance frequency analysis-reliability in third generation instruments: Osstell mentor®. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2012;17(5):e801–6. doi: 10.4317/medoral.17861. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources