PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the fractal dimension (Df) of disks with 3 different surface topographies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty disk-shaped samples (10 × 2 mm) with 3 different surface topographies (Dental Tech, Misinto, Italy) were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy: group A, machined surface; group B, titanium plasma-spray surface; group C, acid-etched and sandblasted surface (Blasted Wrinkled Surface). RESULTS: The amplitude roughness parameter (Sa) of the machined surfaces was 0.6 μm, while the developed surface area ratio (Sdr) was 14%; for the titanium plasma-spray surfaces, the values were, respectively, 5.3 μm and 97%, and for the Blasted Wrinkled Surfaces, 1.5 μm and 63%. Images at 1.000, 20.000, and 50.000 magnifications were processed for quantitative analysis of Df using the box-counting method. At 1.000×, Df for group A, B, and C was 1.86, 1.80, and 1.81, respectively; at 20.000×, Df for group A, B, and C was 1.85, 1.71, 1.58, respectively; and at 50.000×, Df was 1.83, 1.61, and 1.51 for A, B, and C groups. Statistically significant differences were found for Df values. CONCLUSIONS: Df provides not only an index of roughness size values but also a measure of roughness spatial organization; therefore, it could be a promising method to differentiate between rough surfaces capable of supporting osseointegration.

Implant surface topographies analyzed using fractal dimension

IEZZI, GIOVANNA;TRIPODI, Domenico;SCARANO, Antonio;PIATTELLI, Adriano;PERROTTI, Vittoria
2011-01-01

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the fractal dimension (Df) of disks with 3 different surface topographies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty disk-shaped samples (10 × 2 mm) with 3 different surface topographies (Dental Tech, Misinto, Italy) were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy: group A, machined surface; group B, titanium plasma-spray surface; group C, acid-etched and sandblasted surface (Blasted Wrinkled Surface). RESULTS: The amplitude roughness parameter (Sa) of the machined surfaces was 0.6 μm, while the developed surface area ratio (Sdr) was 14%; for the titanium plasma-spray surfaces, the values were, respectively, 5.3 μm and 97%, and for the Blasted Wrinkled Surfaces, 1.5 μm and 63%. Images at 1.000, 20.000, and 50.000 magnifications were processed for quantitative analysis of Df using the box-counting method. At 1.000×, Df for group A, B, and C was 1.86, 1.80, and 1.81, respectively; at 20.000×, Df for group A, B, and C was 1.85, 1.71, 1.58, respectively; and at 50.000×, Df was 1.83, 1.61, and 1.51 for A, B, and C groups. Statistically significant differences were found for Df values. CONCLUSIONS: Df provides not only an index of roughness size values but also a measure of roughness spatial organization; therefore, it could be a promising method to differentiate between rough surfaces capable of supporting osseointegration.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Implant surface topographies analyzed.pdf

Solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: PDF editoriale
Dimensione 5.38 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
5.38 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Implant surface topographies analyzed 2.pdf

Solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: PDF editoriale
Dimensione 473.21 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
473.21 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11564/209604
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 14
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 11
social impact