# Comprehensive Evaluation of Novel Biomaterials for Dental Implant Surfaces: An In Vitro Comparative Study

## TL;DR

This study compares new dental implant materials to traditional ones, finding that titanium-zirconium and hydroxyapatite-coated titanium perform better in key areas like strength and bacterial resistance.

## Contribution

The study introduces a multi-parameter in vitro evaluation of novel dental implant biomaterials, including Ti-Zr and HA-Ti, against conventional CP Ti.

## Key findings

- Ti-Zr and HA-Ti showed superior surface roughness and mechanical strength compared to CP Ti.
- Ti-Zr and HA-Ti exhibited significantly lower bacterial adhesion than other materials.
- Chemical composition analysis confirmed distinct elemental profiles for each biomaterial.

## Abstract

Background: Dental implantology is continually evolving in its quest to discover new biomaterials to improve dental implant success rates. The study explored the potential of innovative biomaterials for dental implant surfaces, including titanium-zirconium (Ti-Zr) alloy, hydroxyapatite-coated titanium (HA-Ti), and porous polyetheretherketone (PEEK), in comparison to conventional commercially pure titanium (CP Ti).

Materials and methods: A total of 186 samples were harvested for the analysis. Biomaterials were thoroughly evaluated in terms of surface topography, chemical composition, biocompatibility, mechanical properties, osseointegration performance, and bacterial adhesion. Study methods and techniques included scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS), cell culture variants, tensile tests, hardness measurements, histological analysis, and microbiological testing.

Results: Surface topography examination showed significant disparities between the biomaterials: Ti-Zr had a better roughness of 1.23 μm, while HA-Ti demonstrated a smoother surface at 0.98 μm. Chemical composition evaluation indicated the presence of a Ti-Zr alloy in Ti-Zr, calcium-phosphorus richness in HA-Ti, and high titanium amounts in CP Ti. The mechanical properties assessment showed that Ti-Zr and CP Ti had good tensile strengths of 750 MPa and 320 HV. In addition, bacterial adhesion tests showed low propensities for Ti-Zr and HA-Ti at 1200 and 800 cfu/cm2, respectively.

Conclusion: Ti-Zr and HA-Ti performed better than the other biomaterials in surface topography and mechanical properties and against bacterial adhesion. This study emphasizes that multi-parameter analysis is critical for clinical decision-making, allowing for the selection of the currently available biomaterial, which could be conducive to the long-term success of the implant.