This review aims to present the mechanisms of protein interactions with titanium dental implant surfaces. Methods: the analyses were based on searches of scientific articles available in English and Portuguese in PubMed (MEDLINE), Bireme (LILACS), Scielo, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Results: titanium dental implant treatments success rates (95-98%) are mainly due to the biocompatibility of titanium oxide on the implant surface, surgical techniques adopted, good implants manufacturing processes and biomechanical knowledge of the systems. Studies in past decades has empirically developed implant surfaces with significant changes in morphologies, roughness, wettability, surface energy, chemical composition, and chemical groups density or deposited molecules. These changes promoted better protein adsorption, osteoblast adhesion, and changes in the mechanisms involved in osseointegration. Thus, the time to put the implant in function has been reduced and the success rates have increased. In the osseointegration process, at the nanoscale, there is no contact between the bone and the implant surface, but there is the formation of a protein anchorage between the periosteum and the implant with an interface formed by proteins. In all the reactions between the body and the implant surface, the activities of fibronectin and integrin are essential, since they are responsible for transmitting information to the cell for its differentiation, adhesion and mobility. Conclusion: thus, the analyses of protein-implant interactions are indispensable for a better understanding of the performance of osseointegrated dental implants.

Osseointegrable dental implants are biomaterials made of titanium or other alloys mixed with titanium, which have high biocompatibility and allow osseointegration. However, this process can be modulated by changes in the complex mechanisms between microbiota, immune response and host. The present study aims to present how the immune system-microbiota-host interaction influences the osseointegration process of titanium dental implants and its alloys. A literature review was performed through electronic and manual searches in several databases, including PubMed, LILACS, Google Scholar, SciELO and Web of Science for articles published in the last 20 years in English and Portuguese. The formation of a temporary fibrin matrix on the implants surface after implantation implies the recruitment, adhesion and activity of immune cells at this site, with the release of pro-inflammatory molecules and recruitment of neutrophils. In the second moment, monocytes and macrophages (M1) are recruited, producing, in this step, reactive oxygen species. In the later stage of inflammation, macrophages (M2) help in tissue regeneration with expression of anti-inflammatory cytokines. In addition, the implants surface provides a site for microbial colonization mediated by salivary pellicle and topographical features. Thus, in symbiosis the modulation of the immune response will be favorable to osseointegration. However, the dysbiotic process exacerbates the inflammatory progression modulating the immune response influencing abnormal tissue healing or scar and fibrosis formation, compromising osseointegration. Different conditions of the subgingival microbiota will influence different immunological cascades, generating different cellular responses and positive or negative modulation of the osseointegration process.

This study analyzed a recently developed bone substitute biomaterial made of chitosan-xanthan- hydroxyapatite-graphene oxide (CXHAG). The CXHAG particles underwent in vitro structural and morphological characterization, and in vivo testing with or without osteogenic conditioned medium from mesenchymal stem cells. Aim: The aim of this study was to determine whether the CXHAG novel biomaterial, supplemented with conditioned medium from mesenchymal stem cells, could be useful for bone regeneration. Materials and Method: For the in vitro study, cells were incubated with 20mg of CXHAG granules for 24 hours and a MTT assay was performed to tests for cytotoxicity. For the in vivo study, critical size calvarial bone defects were created in twenty-five rats. One animal had the defect unfilled (Control Group–CG) and was euthanized after 42 days. Twelve rats received the CXHAG particles (Group 1–G1) and the other twelve received the CXHAG particles supplemented with the conditioned medium (Group 2–G2). All G1/G2 grafts were covered with a CXHAG membrane. G1/G2 animals were euthanized after 14 days (T1) or 42 days (T2). The specimens were processed and histologically evaluated. Results: SEM analysis of the CXHAG particles showed granules of 300-400μm, with a rough irregular surface. They were not cytotoxic to dental pulp stem cells in vitro. The CG specimen showed loose immature connective tissue and no bone formation at the center of the defect. G1 and G2 presented remnant biomaterial particles at both time points, but only G2 had bone formation at the center of the defect. Conclusions: The conditioned medium had a positive effect on bone regeneration in rat calvarial critical size defects when associated with the novel bone substitute biomaterial.

There has yet to be a consensus among researchers, professionals, companies, regulatory agencies, and technical standards regarding the definition of osseointegration. The divergence is conceptual and occurs due to explanations of the mechanisms of interactions among cells and proteins with the implant. In medicine, osseointegration is assessed visually in radiographic examinations by the absence of implant-bone space or by mechanical stability and absence of pain. In the medical field, it is mentioned that there is osseointegration of cemented orthopedic prostheses, stainless steel prostheses, Co-Cr-Mo alloys, and zirconia. In dentistry, osseointegration occurs only with titanium implants and is characterized by bonding bone cells with the implant surface through proteins. Titanium implants are chemically, physically, and mechanically linked to the bone through proteins adhered to their surface without a fibrous connective tissue interface. The protein-titanium connection has mechanical strength and can withstand functional loads on dental implants. Given the divergences in the understanding of osseointegration of titanium and zirconia implants, concepts are presented that explain the differences in biocompatibility and applications of biomaterials, inflammatory processes, osseointegration, foreign body reaction, and the mechanisms of protein interactions with surfaces of titanium and zirconia implants.

The peri-implant ligament is formed from the interface of bone tissue, through the anchoring of proteins and the surface of the dental implant. In this sense, it is relevant to understand the extent to which this ligament is structured and biomimics the periodontal ligament functions. Aim: The goal of this scoping review is to present and analyze the peri-implant ligament composition and compare the extent to which this ligament is structured and biomimics the periodontal ligament functions. Methods: This scoping review was performed according to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping review. Two independent researchers searched Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase, Virtual Health Library, Scielo, Scopus, Web of Science, Brazilian Bibliography of Dentistry, Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences, Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations from the University of São Paulo and Portal Capes. Studies published in English, Portuguese and Spanish, over the last 21 years (2000-2021). Results: A total of 330 titles were identified and after applying inclusion and exclusion factors, 27 studies were included in this review. All proteins were identified regarding their tissue function and classified into 6 major protein groups. After that this new protein ligament was compared with the periodontal ligament regarding its function and composition. The main proteins associated with osseointegration, and thus, with the peri-implant ligament are recognized as belonging to the periodontal ligament. Conclusion: This scoping review results suggest evidence of the composition and function of the periimplant ligament. However, variations may still exist due to the existence of several modulants of the osseointegration process.