Related Experiment Videos
Clinical evaluation of hydroxyapatite-coated titanium plasma-sprayed and titanium plasma-sprayed cylinder dental
J D Jones1, M Saigusa, J E Van Sickels
1Department of Prosthodontics, University of Texas, Health Science Center, San Antonio, USA.
Objective:
The purpose of this article was to present the preliminary results of a prospective clinical trial comparing titanium plasma-sprayed versus hydroxyapatite-coated titanium plasma-sprayed cylinder (press fit) implants in different regions of the mouth.
Study Design:
Sixty-five subjects met the inclusion requirements. Surgery was done in two phases by four experienced surgeons. Implant placement and abutment connection were separated by 3 to 4 months in the mandible, 6 to 7 months in the maxilla. Patients were assigned to either titanium plasma-sprayed or hydroxyapatite-coated implants on the day of surgery. Implant placement was not stratified for the region of the jaws. Outcome assessment was failure (loss) of an implant before or within 3 months of second phase surgery.
Results:
Three hundred fifty-two implants equally distributed between titanium plasma-sprayed and hydroxyapatite-coated titanium plasma-sprayed implants were placed in four different sites; anterior maxilla, posterior maxilla, anterior mandible, and posterior mandible. There were a total of 15 failures (4.26%). Overall, titanium plasma-sprayed implants showed a higher but not significant failure rate compared with hydroxyapatite-coated implants (p = 0.06). Although not statistically significant, we believe that a smoking history played an important role in the failure of implants.
Conclusion:
This study suggests that an hydroxyapatite-coating of an implant allows superior initial integration when compared with a titanium plasma-sprayed surface.