The aim of this study was to find in the literature data on the relationship between implant surface roughness and implant stability achieved, from the time of placement to three months afterward, to help us to know what type of surface roughness is more favorable to guarantee implant stability and osseointegration. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis) statement, and the protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework. The specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected using the PICOS framework. The databases Medline (PubMed), Scopus, the Web of Science and The Cochrane Library were searched up to October 2023. The selection of studies and data extraction were conducted by two independent reviewers. The review included a total of 11 studies. A total of 1331 dental implant placements were identified. Two of the eleven selected studies were on humans in vivo, eight were on animals in vivo, and one was on animals in vitro. A statistically significant correlation between surface roughness and implant stability as measured by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) was not identified in ten of the eleven selected studies. It appears that there is no correlation between primary stability and the degree of implant roughness. However, there appears to be a correlation between the roughness of the implant and the degree of osseointegration, as indicated by bone-implant contact values. This correlation is more closely related to secondary stability. The great methodological variability makes it difficult to compare data and draw conclusions, so it would be desirable to agree on a common methodology to help draw appropriate conclusions from published studies.

Introduction Preserving peri-implant tissues after immediate implant placement (IIP), especially in aesthetic zones, is a topic of interest. Objectives This systematic review investigated the effects of currently available surgical procedures for preserving peri-implant tissue or ensuring dimensional stability following immediate implant placement. Materials and methods The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement’s guidelines were followed, and articles were sought on the PubMed and Cochrane databases with no date restrictions. Only randomised clinical trials that evaluated changes in soft and hard tissues around immediately placed implants were included. Statistical analyses were performed, and the studies´ quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. The agreement between reviewers was assessed based on Cohen’s kappa statistics. Results Of the 14 studies that met the inclusion criteria, 11 were analysed in the meta-analysis (kappa = 0.814; almost perfect agreement). The use of connective tissue grafts resulted in a significantly greater improvement of the facial gingival level (MD = −0.51; 95% CI: −0.76 to −0.31; p = < .001), and the placement of bone grafts significantly reduced the horizontal resorption of the buccal bone (MD = −0.59; 95% CI: −0.78 to −0.39; p < .001). Conclusion Connective tissue grafts and bone grafts positively influence tissue preservation around immediately placed implants. Neither the flapless technique nor palatal implant positioning resulted in significant improvements to any of the investigated parameters. Additional longitudinal studies are required. Clinical relevance This meta-analysis is useful for discerning the effects of soft tissue augmentation, bone grafting, the flapless technique, and palatal implant positioning on preserving peri-implant tissues after immediate implant placement.

Purpose: The objective of this study was to assess the influence of a novel surface of dental implants (ContacTi^®) on the osseointegration process in a minipig model. The surface was compared with other existing surfaces on the market (SLA^® and SLActive^®) by employing bone implant contact analysis (BIC) and implant stability. Method: Twelve minipigs were used with prior authorisation from an ethics committee. Three types of surfaces were tested: SLA^® (sand-blasted acid-etched titanium), SLActive^® (same but hydrophilic, performed under a nitrogen atmosphere), and ContacTi^® (alumina particle bombardment of titanium, bioactivated when treated thermochemically) in 4.1 mm × 8 mm implants with internal connection and a polished neck. Twelve implants of each surface type (N = 36) were placed, sacrificing 1/3 of the animals at 2 weeks of placement, 1/3 at 4 weeks and the remaining 1/3 at 8 weeks. Numerical variables were compared with Analysis of Variance, and the correlation between ISQ and BIC was established with the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient. Results: SLActive^® and ContacTi^® surfaces showed elevated osteoconductivity at 4 weeks, maintaining a similar evolution at 8 weeks (large amount of mature lamellar tissue with high maturity and bone quality). The SLA^® surface showed slower maturation. The ISQ values in surgery were elevated (above 65), higher at necropsy and higher at 4 and 8 weeks in the SLA^® group than in the other two (SLActive^® and ContacTi^®). No significant correlation was found between ISQ and BIC for each implant surface and necropsy time. Conclusion: The three surfaces analysed showed high RFA and BIC values, which were more favourable for the SLActive^® and ContacTi^® surfaces. No statistical correlation was found between the RFA and BIC values in any of the three surfaces analysed.

In the placement of dental implants, the primary fixation between the dental implant and the bone is of great importance and corresponds to compressive mechanical fixation that aims to prevent micromovement of the implant. The aim of this research was to determine the role of roughness and the type of dental implant (tissue-level or bone-level) in implant stability, measured using resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and insertion torque (IT). We analyzed 234 titanium dental implants, placed in fresh calf ribs, at the half-tissue level and half-bone level. The implant surface was subjected to grit-blasting treatments with alumina particles of 120, 300, and 600 μm at a projection pressure of 2.5 bar, resulting in three types of roughness. Roughness was determined via optical interferometry. The wettability of the surfaces was also determined. Implant stability was measured using a high-precision torquemeter to obtain IT, and RFA was used to determine the implant stability quotient (ISQ). The results show that rough surfaces with Sa values of 0.5 to 4 μm do not affect the primary stability. However, the type of implant is important; bone-level implants obtained the highest primary stability values. A good correlation between the primary stability values obtained via IT and ISQ was demonstrated. New in vivo studies are necessary to know whether these results can be maintained in the long term.

AimTo evaluate the influence on peri-implant crestal bone loss exerted by the vertical mucosal thickness and the abutment height over 12 months after placement of the restoration on subcrestal implants with change of platform, using a restoration abutment platform smaller than the implant platform.Materials and MethodsA total of 99 implants were rehabilitated in the maxillary and mandibular posterior regions. A total of 22 implants were rehabilitated in the maxilla and 77 implants in the mandible, using digitally designed customized abutments with Atlantis weborder software, from the commercial house Dentsply Sirona (Dentsply Sirona S.A., Barcelona, Spain), version 4.6.5, adapting the height to the vertical thickness of the mucosa. Clinical and radiographic monitoring begins during the surgical procedure of placement of the implant and ends 12 months afterwards. Crestal bone loss was evaluated through the Carestream (R) CS8100 3D radiographic equipment.ResultsIn all cases, the greatest loss of marginal bone occurred between the day of surgery (Tx) and placement of the rehabilitation (To). The average bone loss between both times was greater when the abutment height and vertical mucosal thickness did not exceed 3 mm. Subsequently, bone loss slowed and stabilized at 12 months.ConclusionsThe minimum abutment height and the vertical mucosal thickness are factors to take into account when minimizing peri-implant marginal bone loss, the abutment height having the greatest importance according to the clinical data obtained.

The following five factors established by Albrektsson for osseointegration of dental implants are well known: dental implant material, design, surface, surgical technique, bone quality, and mechanical conditions