A pilot study to evaluate the success and survival rate of titanium-zirconium implants in partially edentulous patients: results after 24 months of follow-up

Implants made from a new titanium-zirconium (TiZr) alloy (Roxolid) have shown good osseointegration with no adverse effects in animal studies. This single-cohort pilot study was performed to evaluate the performance and safe use of reduced-diameter implants made from this new TiZr alloy for the first time in human subjects, in a prospective case-controlled series.

Small-diameter titanium grade IV and titanium-zirconium implants in edentulous mandibles: five-year results from a double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to compare the 5-year survival and success rates of 3.3 mm dental implants either made from titanium-zirconium (TiZr) alloy or from Grade IV titanium (Ti Grade IV) in mandibular implant-based removable overdentures. METHODS The core study had a follow-up period of 36 months and was designed as a randomized, controlled, double-blind, split-mouth multicenter clinical trial. Patients with edentulous mandibles received two Straumann Bone Level implants (diameter 3.3 mm, SLActive®), one of TiZr (test) and one of Ti Grade IV (control), in the interforaminal region. This follow-up study recruited patients from the core study and evaluated the plaque and sulcus bleeding indices, radiographic crestal bone level, as well as implant survival and success 60 months after implant placement. RESULTS Of the 91 patients who initially received implants, 75 completed the 36 month follow-up and 49 were available for the 60 month examination. Two patients were excluded so that a total of 47 patients with an average age of 72 ± 8 years were analysed. The characteristics and 36-month performance of the present study cohort did not differ from the non-included initial participants (p > 0.05). In the period since the 36-month follow-up examination, no implant was lost. The cumulative implant survival rate was 98.9 % for the TiZr group and 97.8 % for the Ti Grade IV group. Crestal bone level changes at 60 months were not different in the test and control group (TiZr -0.60 ± 0.69 mm and Ti Grade IV -0.61 ± 0.83 mm; p = 0.96). The cumulative implant success rate after 60 months was 95.8 and 92.6 % for TiZr and Ti Grade IV, respectively. CONCLUSIONS After 60 months, the positive outcomes of the 36 month results for TiZr and Ti Grade IV implants were confirmed, with no significant differences with regard to crestal bone level change, clinical parameters and survival or success rates. TiZr implants performed equally well compared to conventional Ti Grade IV 3.3 mm diameter-reduced implants for mandibular removable overdentures. TRIAL REGISTRATION Registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01878331.

Small-diameter titanium Grade IV and titanium-zirconium implants in edentulous mandibles: three-year results from a double-blind, randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to compare crestal bone-level changes, soft tissue parameters and implant success and survival between small-diameter implants made of titanium/zirconium (TiZr) alloy or of Grade IV titanium (Ti) in edentulous mandibles restored with removable overdentures. MATERIALS AND METHODS This was a randomized, controlled, double-blind, split-mouth multicenter clinical trial. Patients with edentulous mandibles received two Straumann bone-level implants (diameter 3.3 mm), one of Ti Grade IV (control) and one of TiZr (test), in the interforaminal region. Implants were loaded after 6-8 weeks and removable Locator-retained overdentures were placed within 2 weeks of loading. Modified plaque and sulcus bleeding indices, radiographic bone level, and implant survival and success were evaluated up to 36 months. RESULTS Of 91 treated patients, 75 completed the three-year follow-up. Three implants were lost (two control and one test implant). The survival rates were 98.7% and 97.3%, and the mean marginal bone level change was -0.78 ± 0.75 and -0.60 ± 0.71 mm for TiZr and Ti Grade IV implants. Most patients had a plaque score of 0 or 1 (54% for test and 51.7% for control), and a sulcus bleeding score of 0 (46.1% for test and 44.9% for control). No significant differences were found between the two implant types for bone-level change, soft tissue parameters, survival and success. CONCLUSIONS After 36 months, similar outcomes were found between Ti Grade IV and TiZr implants. The results confirm that the results seen at 12 months continue over time.

Bone apposition to a titanium-zirconium alloy implant, as compared to two other titanium-containing implants

Implants made of commercially pure titanium (cpTi) are widely and successfully used in dentistry. For certain indications, diameter-reduced Ti alloy implants with improved mechanical strength are highly desirable. The aim was to compare the osseointegration of titanium-zirconium (TiZr) and cpTi implants with a modified sandblasted and acid-etched (SLActive) surface and with a Ti6Al4V alloy that was sand-blasted and acid-washed. Cylindrical implants with two, 0.75 mm deep, circumferential grooves were placed in the maxilla of miniature pigs and allowed to heal for 1, 2, 4 and 8 weeks. Undecalcified toluidine blue-stained ground sections were produced. Surface topography, area fraction of tissue components, and bone-to-implant contact (BIC) were determined. All materials showed significantly different surface roughness parameters. The amount of new bone within the implant grooves increased over time, without significant differences between materials. However, BIC values were significantly related to the implant material and the healing period. For TiZr and cpTi implants, the BIC increased over time, reaching values of 59.38 % and 76.15 % after 2 weeks, and 74.50 % and 84.67 % after 8 weeks, respectively. In contrast, the BIC for Ti6Al4V implants peaked with 42.29 % after 2 weeks followed by a decline to 28.60 % at 8 weeks. Significantly more surface was covered by multinucleated giant cells on Ti6Al4V implants after 4 and 8 weeks. In conclusion, TiZr and cpTi implants showed faster osseointegration than Ti6Al4V implants. Both chemistry and surface topography might have influenced the results. The use of diameter-reduced TiZr implants in more challenging clinical situations warrants further documentation in long-term clinical studies.