Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Mar 19, 2026

Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness
06:36

Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness

Published on: March 14, 2025

984

Turned versus anodised dental implants: a meta-analysis.

B R Chrcanovic1, T Albrektsson1,2, A Wennerberg1

  • 1Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.

Journal of Oral Rehabilitation
|June 14, 2016
PubMed
Summary

Dental implants with turned surfaces show a significantly higher failure rate compared to anodised-surface implants. However, both implant types demonstrated comparable marginal bone loss, with infection data being inconclusive.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Investigation of the Telomere Length in PERI-Implant Oral Mucosa Cells.

Journal of oral pathology & medicine : official publication of the International Association of Oral Pathologists and the American Academy of Oral Pathology·2025
Same author

Treatments to Avoid Ranula Recurrence: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Journal of oral pathology & medicine : official publication of the International Association of Oral Pathologists and the American Academy of Oral Pathology·2025
Same author

Two-piece Zirconia Implants: An Office based Retrospective Study with up to 7 and mean 3 Year Follow-Up.

The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants·2025
Same author

Immediate implant placement in the premolar maxillary area: a cone-beam computed tomography study.

Journal of periodontal & implant science·2024
Same author

Clinical Outcomes of Pterygoid and Maxillary Tuberosity Implants: A Systematic Review.

Journal of clinical medicine·2024
Same author

Clinical Outcomes of Maxillary Sinus Floor Perforation by Dental Implants and Sinus Membrane Perforation during Sinus Augmentation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Journal of clinical medicine·2024

Area of Science:

  • Dental Implantology
  • Biomaterials Science
  • Oral Surgery

Background:

  • Implant surface characteristics significantly influence osseointegration and long-term success.
  • Turned and anodised surfaces represent distinct surface topographies with potentially different clinical outcomes.
  • Understanding comparative failure rates and marginal bone loss is crucial for clinical decision-making.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the implant failure rates between turned and anodised-surface implants.
  • To evaluate differences in marginal bone loss (MBL) associated with these implant surfaces.
  • To assess the risk of post-operative infection for turned versus anodised-surface implants.

Main Methods:

  • A comprehensive meta-analysis of published clinical human studies was conducted.
Keywords:
anodised implantsdental implantsimplant failure ratemarginal bone lossmeta-analysisturned implants

More Related Videos

Oral Biofilm Formation on Different Materials for Dental Implants
11:19

Oral Biofilm Formation on Different Materials for Dental Implants

Published on: June 24, 2018

12.3K
An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage
11:51

An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage

Published on: February 10, 2014

16.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Mar 19, 2026

Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness
06:36

Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness

Published on: March 14, 2025

984
Oral Biofilm Formation on Different Materials for Dental Implants
11:19

Oral Biofilm Formation on Different Materials for Dental Implants

Published on: June 24, 2018

12.3K
An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage
11:51

An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage

Published on: February 10, 2014

16.0K
  • An electronic literature search was performed in November 2015 without time or language restrictions.
  • Thirty-eight eligible publications were included to analyze implant failure, MBL, and infection rates.

    • Main Results:

    • Turned implants exhibited a 2.82-fold increased risk of failure compared to anodised-surface implants (P < 0.00001).
    • No statistically significant difference in marginal bone loss (MBL) was observed between turned and anodised implants (MD = 0.02 mm).
    • Meta-analysis for post-operative infection was not feasible due to insufficient data.

    Conclusions:

    • Turned surface implants are associated with a significantly higher failure rate than anodised-surface implants.
    • Marginal bone loss is not significantly affected by the implant surface type (turned vs. anodised).
    • Further research is needed to evaluate infection rates and long-term outcomes, considering potential confounding factors.