A review on the performance of the proactive implant surface


A review on the performance of the proactive implant surface


Mazen A. Almasri

Associate professor of oral maxillofacial surgery, King Abdulaiz University, Jeddah City, Saudi Arabia


American Journal of Geographical Research and Reviews

Objective: to review the performance of the proactive hydrophilic implant system in the implantology practice.
Materials and methods: a thorough literature review took place by looking into pubmed and google scholar searching engines. A total number of 310 articles were found. The aim was to review the literature commenting on the clinical and microlevel performances. Hence, 21 articles were included to cover three major categories which are: in Microlevel (group A), clinical (group B), and performance with grafting materials (group C).
Results:  Group A; showed stable osseointegration indicating the efficacy of the hydrophilic proactive surface.  Group B; indicated favourable outcomes in managing cases of immediate implants with successful variable loading protocols.  Group C; showed favourable reactions with grafting and non-grafting groups.
Conclusion: It seems that the proactive implant surface is showing promising results with acceptable supporting literature so far.


Keywords: dental implant, surface, hydrophilic, proactive, Neoss

Free Full-text PDF


How to cite this article:
Emilia Karova, Irina Tsenova, Viktoria Petrova, Alexander Bonchev, Violeta Dogandzhiyska. Perceptions of Endodontic Treatment Outcomes Provided by Undergraduate Students and Endodontic Specialists. International Journal of Dental Research and Reviews, 2019, 2:12. DOI: 10.28933/ijdrr-2019-03-1507


References:

1. Grossi-Oliveira GA, Antunes AA, Elias CN, Wennerberg A, Sennerby L, Salata LA. Early Osseointegration Events on Neoss® ProActive and Bimodal Implants: A Comparison of Different Surfaces in an Animal Model. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research. 2015;17(6):1060-72.
2. Jimbo R, Ono D, Hirakawa Y, Odatsu T, Tanaka T, Sawase T. Accelerated photo-induced hydrophilicity promotes osseointegration: an animal study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2011;13(1):79-85.
3. Shibata Y, Suzuki D, Omori S, Tanaka R, Murakami A, Kataoka Y, et al. The characteristics of in vitro biological activity of titanium surfaces anodically oxidized in chloride solutions. Biomaterials. 2010;31(33):8546-55.
4. Campbell DI, Duncan WJ. The Effect of a Keratin Hydrogel Coating on Osseointegration: An Histological Comparison of Coated and Non-coated Dental Titanium Implants in an Ovine Model. Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery. 2014;13(2):159-64.
5. Hong J, Kurt S, Thor A. A hydrophilic dental implant surface exhibits thrombogenic properties in vitro. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2013;15(1):105-12.
6. Vasak C, Busenlechner D, Schwarze UY, Leitner HF, Munoz Guzon F, Hefti T, et al. Early bone apposition to hydrophilic and hydrophobic titanium implant surfaces: a histologic and histomorphometric study in minipigs. Clinical oral implants research. 2014;25(12):1378-85.
7. Acham S, Rugani P, Truschnegg A, Wildburger A, Wegscheider WA, Jakse N. Immediate loading of four interforaminal implants supporting a locator-retained mandibular overdenture in the elderly. Results of a 3-year randomized, controlled, prospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017;19(5):895-900.
8. Alsabeeha NH, De Silva RK, Thomson WM, Payne AG. Primary stability measurements of single implants in the midline of the edentulous mandible for overdentures. Clinical oral implants research. 2010;21(5):563-6.
9. Alsabeeha NH, Payne AG, De Silva RK, Thomson WM. Mandibular single-implant overdentures: preliminary results of a randomised-control trial on early loading with different implant diameters and attachment systems. Clinical oral implants research. 2011;22(3):330-7.
10. Andersson P, Degasperi W, Verrocchi D, Sennerby L. A Retrospective Study on Immediate Placement of Neoss Implants with Early Loading of Full-Arch Bridges. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015;17(4):646-57.
11. Bogaerde LV, Pedretti G, Sennerby L, Meredith N. Immediate/Early function of Neoss implants placed in maxillas and posterior mandibles: an 18-month prospective case series study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2010;12 Suppl 1:e83-94.
12. Becker W, Becker BE, Hujoel P, Abu Ras Z, Goldstein M, Smidt A. Prospective clinical trial evaluating a new implant system for implant survival, implant stability and radiographic bone changes. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2013;15(1):15-21.
13. Dahlin C, Widmark G, Bergkvist G, Furst B, Widbom T, Kashani H. One-year results of a clinical and radiological prospective multicenter study on NEOSS(R) dental implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2013;15(2):303-8.
14. Degasperi W, Andersson P, Verrocchi D, Sennerby L. One-year clinical and radiographic results with a novel hydrophilic titanium dental implant. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014;16(4):511-9.
15. Sennerby L, Andersson P, Verrocchi D, Viinamaki R. One-year outcomes of Neoss bimodal implants. A prospective clinical, radiographic, and RFA study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14(3):313-20.
16. Rosen PS, Sahlin H, Seemann R, Rosen AS. A 1-7 year retrospective follow-up on consecutively placed 7-mm-long dental implants with an electrowetted surface. International journal of implant dentistry. 2018;4(1):24.
17. Volpe S, Lanza M, Verrocchi D, Sennerby L. Clinical outcomes of an osteotome technique and simultaneous placement of Neoss implants in the posterior maxilla. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2013;15(1):22-8.
18. Pagliani L, Motroni A, Nappo A, Sennerby L. Short communication: use of a diagnostic software to predict bone density and implant stability in preoperative CTs. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14(4):553-7.
19. Turkyilmaz I, Sennerby L, McGlumphy EA, Tozum TF. Biomechanical aspects of primary implant stability: a human cadaver study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2009;11(2):113-9.
20. Zumstein T, Sennerby L. A 1-Year Clinical and Radiographic Study on Hydrophilic Dental Implants Placed with and without Bone Augmentation Procedures. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2016;18(3):498-506.
21. Zumstein T, Billstrom C, Sennerby L. A 4- to 5-year retrospective clinical and radiographic study of Neoss implants placed with or without GBR procedures. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14(4):480-90.