Comparison of the biocompatibility of a ceramic and titanium implant materials- in-vitro assays and systematic review

Abstract

Abstract Objective: This study comprised the following two components: a review examining and comparing the biocompatibility of zirconium ceramic, titanium and other dental implant materials, and a laboratory study learning methods that will be used for an in-depth exploration of the biocompatibility of different implant materials. Methods: the scoping review employed electronic searches to identify papers examining and comparing the biocompatibility 1) of zirconium ceramic, titanium and other implant materials, 2) different surface topologies of implant materials and, 3) the time required for ‘healing’ around these implant materials. In the laboratory study, MM3 cells was subcultured in 90mm dishes coated with collagen type I. A growth curve assay was used to quantify the number of cells at Day 1, Day 3 and Day 7 in contact with a ceramic material compared with a control material. Results: the review identified 23 in vitro studies, four of which examined the biocompatibility of zirconia and titanium in addition to other implant materials. As the studies used different methodologies, it was not possible to compare directly their findings. However, it appeared that biocompatibility was related more with the surface characteristics, than the implant material per sec. In the laboratory study, there was no difference in the number of mesenchymal cells in contact with the ceramic and control material at each of the three elected time intervals. In addition, it was found the number of the cells increased three-fold between Day 1 and Day 3 and one further third between Day 3 and Day 7. Conclusion: the review identified papers that explored the biocompatibility of different implant materials but used different methodologies. A valid and universally accepted assay is required. In addition, this scoping review should be enhanced to a full systematic 1 2 review by recruiting critical appraisal tools. This aspect of the study fed into the laboratory component; it is intended to enhance the laboratory component by identifying a valid methodology to measure the biocompatibility of different dental implant materials, and then to ascertain if zirconia could used as an alternative material to titanium.