Effect of mechanical instrumentation on titanium implant surface properties

Mohammed Alabbad; Nick Silikas; Andrew Thomas

doi:10.1016/j.dental.2024.12.014

Effect of mechanical instrumentation on titanium implant surface properties

Dent Mater. 2025 Jan 8:S0109-5641(24)00372-5. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2024.12.014. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Mohammed Alabbad¹, Nick Silikas², Andrew Thomas³

Affiliations

¹ Division of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK; Department of Periodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia. Electronic address: mohammed.alabbad@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk.
² Division of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK. Electronic address: nikolaos.silikas@manchester.ac.uk.
³ Department of Materials, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK; Photon Science Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK. Electronic address: andrew.g.thomas@manchester.ac.uk.

PMID: 39788843
DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2024.12.014

Abstract

Objective: To assess the impact of mechanical decontamination using rotary brushes on the surface topography, elemental composition, roughness, and wettability of titanium implant surfaces.

Methods: Four commercially available rotary brushes were used: Labrida BioClean Brush® (LB), i-Brush1 (IB), NiTiBrush Nano (NiTiB), and Peri-implantitis Brush (PIB). Seventy-five titanium discs with sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched (SLA) surfaces were randomly assigned to five groups (n = 15): LB, IB, NiTiB, PIB, and a control group. Each disc was treated for 60 seconds with the respective rotary brush according to the manufacturer's instructions. Surface morphology was analysed using Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), surface elemental composition with Energy Dispersive X-ray (EDX), surface roughness via optical profilometry, and wettability with a droplet shape analyser.

Results: SEI analysis revealed morphological changes, including scratches, flattening, and loose titanium particles in the IB, PIB, and NiTiB groups, whereas the LB group preserved the original surface morphology. SEM-EDX analysis showed that LB, PIB, and NiTiB groups closely match the control elemental composition. However, IB groups showed significantly different composition. Surface roughness values in the IB, PIB, and NiTiB groups differed significantly from the control (p < 0.05), whereas the LB group had comparable roughness values (p > 0.05). Contact angle measurements indicated enhanced wettability in IB, PIB, and NiTiB groups (p < 0.05), while the LB group exhibited values comparable to the control (p > 0.05).

Significance: Mechanical decontamination of implant surfaces utilising rotary brushes can alter implant surface properties.

Keywords: Decontamination; EDX; Mechanical treatment; Peri-implantitis; Peri-implantitis treatment; Physical decontamination; SLA; Surface roughness; Titanium brush; Wettability.