This review addresses the different aspects of the use of titanium and its alloys in the production of dental implants, the most common causes of implant failures and the development of improved surfaces capable of stimulating osseointegration and guaranteeing the long-term success of dental implants. Titanium is the main material for the development of dental implants; despite this, different surface modifications are studied aiming to improve the osseointegration process. Nanoscale modifications and the bioactivation of surfaces with biological molecules can promote faster healing when compared to smooth surfaces. Recent studies have also pointed out that gradual changes in the implant, based on the microenvironment of insertion, are factors that may improve the integration of the implant with soft and bone tissues, preventing infections and osseointegration failures. In this context, the understanding that nanobiotechnological surface modifications in titanium dental implants improve the osseointegration process arouses interest in the development of new strategies, which is a highly relevant factor in the production of improved dental materials.

Titanium is usually used in the manufacturing of metal implants due to its biocompatibility and high resistance to corrosion. A structural and functional connection between the living bone and the surface of the implant, a process called osseointegration, is mandatory for avoiding prolonged healing, infections, and tissue loss. Therefore, osseointegration is crucial for the success of the implantation procedure. Osseointegration is a process mediated by bone-matrix progenitor cells’ proteins, named integrins. In this study, we used an in silico approach to assemble and test peptides that can be strategically used in sensitizing TiO₂ implants in order to improve osseointegration. To do so, we downloaded PDB structures of integrins α5β1, αvβ3, and αIIbβ3; their biological ligands; and low-cost proteins from the Protein Data Bank, and then we performed a primary (integrin-protein) docking analysis. Furthermore, we modeled complex peptides with the potential to bind to the TiO₂ surface on the implant, as well as integrins in the bone-matrix progenitor cells. Then we performed a secondary (integrin–peptide) docking analysis. The ten most promising integrin–peptide docking results were further verified by molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. We recognized 82 peptides with great potential to bind the integrins, and therefore to be used in coating TiO₂ implants. Among them, peptides 1 (GHTHYHAVRTQTTGR), 3 (RKLPDATGR), and 8 (GHTHYHAVRTQTLKA) showed the highest binding stability during the MD simulations. This bioinformatics approach saves time and more effectively directs in vitro studies.