Комплексная оценка поверхности дентальных имплантатов методом растровой электронной микроскопии и энергодисперсионного рентгеновского элементного анализа (EDX)

В статье представлены актуальные данные по возможностям анализа поверхности дентальных имплантатов. Рассмотрены международные научные публикации. На основании проведенного литературного обзора и экспериментальной части исследования был предложен оптимизированной метод комплексной оценки топографии и чистоты дентальных имплантатов с учетом возможностей его проведения на территории Российской Федерации.

The article presents current data on the possibility of complex analyses of the implant surface. Modern international guidelines and scientific publications considered. Based on the literature review and experimental part of the study an optimized method of complex analyses of the topography and cleanness of the dental implant surface that can be easily conducted on the territory of the Russian Federation.

имплантаты дентальные, обработка поверхности имплантата, контаминация поверхности имплантата, РЭМ.

dental implants, implant surface treatment, implant surface contamination, SEM.

/ REFERENCES:
1. Albrektsson T., Canullo L, Cochran D, De Bruyn H., «Peri-Implantitis»: A Complication of a Foreign Body or a Man-Made «Disease». Facts and Fiction. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2016. 18(4):840-9.
2. Albrektsson T., et al. Is marginal bone loss around oral implants the result of a provoked foreign body reaction? Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2014. 16(2): p. 155-65.
3. Duddeck, D.U. Quality Assessment оf Dental Implants Under Aspects оf SEM and EDX Analysis - A Comparison of Five One-Piece Implants. Romanian Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 2016; 8(2): 32-39.
4. Duddeck, D.U., et al., Surface characteristics and quality of implants in sterile packaging - SEM examination and qualitative/quantitative elemental analysis of 57 implants. EDI journal, 2013. 9(2013-1): p. 48-58.
5. Fernando J.D., Ramón F., Pablo N., Benjamin W., Eduardo B. Assessment of the Chemical Composition in Different Dental Implant Types: An Analysis through EDX System. MDPI, Coatings 2020, 10, 882;.
6. Gehrke, P. and J. Neugebauer, Implant surface design: using biotechnology to enhance osseointegration. Interview. Dent Implantol Update, 2003. 14(8): p. 57-64-6.
7. Granchi, D., et al., The influence of alumina and ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene particles on osteoblast-osteoclast cooperation. Biomaterials, 2004. 25(18): p. 4037-45.
8. Grassi S., Piattelli A, de Figueiredo LC, Feres M, de Melo L, Iezzi G, Alba RC Jr, Shibli JA., Histologic evaluation of early bone response to different implant surfaces. J Periodontol, 2006. 77(10):1736-43.
9. Li Zhang, El-Mustapha Haddouti, Kristian Welle, Christof Burger 1, Dieter C Wirtz, Frank A Schildberg 1, Koroush Kabir. The Effects of Biomaterial Implant Wear Debris on Osteoblasts Front Cell Dev Biol. 2020, 3(8): 352.
10. Nasatzky E., Gultchin J., Schwartz Z., The role of surface roughness in promoting osteointegration. Refuat Hapeh Vehashinayim (1993) 2003; 20(3):8-19, 98.
11. Yunpeng Jiang, Tanghong Jia, Paul H Wooley, Shang-You Yang. Current research in the pathogenesis of aseptic implant loosening associated with particulate wear debris. Acta Orthop Belg, 2013; 79(1):1-9.