Corrosion resistance of coupled sandblasted, large‐grit, acid‐etched (SLA) and anodized Ti implant surfaces in synthetic saliva

Abstract Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the corrosion resistance of galvanically coupled SLA and anodized implant surfaces with a Co‐Cr alloy. Materials and Methods Three groups were included in this study. The first (SLA) was composed of SLA implants (Institut Straumann, Basel...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ala'a Al Otaibi (Author), El‐Sayed M. Sherif (Author), Mohammed Q. Al‐Rifaiy (Author), Spiros Zinelis (Author), Youssef S. Al Jabbari (Author)
Format: Book
Published: Wiley, 2019-10-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_c9d823f08a0847c99d66692e65d12e1d
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Ala'a Al Otaibi  |e author 
700 1 0 |a El‐Sayed M. Sherif  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Mohammed Q. Al‐Rifaiy  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Spiros Zinelis  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Youssef S. Al Jabbari  |e author 
245 0 0 |a Corrosion resistance of coupled sandblasted, large‐grit, acid‐etched (SLA) and anodized Ti implant surfaces in synthetic saliva 
260 |b Wiley,   |c 2019-10-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 2057-4347 
500 |a 10.1002/cre2.198 
520 |a Abstract Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the corrosion resistance of galvanically coupled SLA and anodized implant surfaces with a Co‐Cr alloy. Materials and Methods Three groups were included in this study. The first (SLA) was composed of SLA implants (Institut Straumann, Basel, Switzerland), the second (ANO) of NobelReplace® (Nobel Biocare, Göteborg, Sweden), and the third (MIX) of both implant systems combined. All groups were assembled with a single Co‐Cr superstructure. Electrochemical testing included open‐circuit potential, electrochemical impedance spectroscopy, cyclic potentiodynamic polarization, and chronoamperometric current‐time measurements. The quantitative results (EOCP, ECORR, ICORR, EPROT, RP, and ICA) were statistically analyzed by one‐way ANOVA and Tukey's post‐hoc multiple comparison test (α = 0.05) Results All the aforementioned parameters showed statistically significant differences apart from ECORR and EPROT. The evaluation of qualitative and quantitative results showed that although SLA had higher corrosion resistance compared with ANO, it had less resistance to pitting corrosion. This means that SLA showed increased resistance to uniform corrosion but less resistance if pitting corrosion was initiated. In all cases, MIX showed intermediate behavior. Conclusion The corrosion resistance of implant‐retained superstructures is dependent on the electrochemical properties of the implants involved, and thus different degrees of intraoral corrosion resistance among different implant systems are anticipated. 
546 |a EN 
690 |a dental implant systems 
690 |a EIS 
690 |a electrochemical testing 
690 |a NobelReplace® 
690 |a Straumann® 
690 |a Dentistry 
690 |a RK1-715 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n Clinical and Experimental Dental Research, Vol 5, Iss 5, Pp 452-459 (2019) 
787 0 |n https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.198 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/2057-4347 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/c9d823f08a0847c99d66692e65d12e1d  |z Connect to this object online.