Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
BioMed Research International
Volume 2015 (2015), Article ID 761718, 8 pages
Research Article

Assessment of Atmospheric Pressure Plasma Treatment for Implant Osseointegration

1Department of Biomaterials and Biomimetics, New York University, 345 East 24th Street, Room 804 S, New York, NY 10010, USA
2School of Chemical Engineering, Oklahoma State University, 423 Engineering North, Stillwater, OK 74078, USA
3Department of Prosthodontics, University of São Paulo Bauru College of Dentistry, Al Otávio Pinheiro Brisola 9-75, 17012-901 Bauru, SP, Brazil
4Department of Prosthodontics, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, 1 Kneeland Street, Boston, MA 02111, USA
5Department of Periodontology and Implant Dentistry, New York University College of Dentistry, New York, USA
6Division of Engineering, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Received 25 September 2014; Revised 18 January 2015; Accepted 23 January 2015

Academic Editor: Rolando A. Gittens

Copyright © 2015 Natalie R. Danna et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


This study assessed the osseointegrative effects of atmospheric pressure plasma (APP) surface treatment for implants in a canine model. Control surfaces were untreated textured titanium (Ti) and calcium phosphate (CaP). Experimental surfaces were their 80-second air-based APP-treated counterparts. Physicochemical characterization was performed to assess topography, surface energy, and chemical composition. One implant from each control and experimental group (four in total) was placed in one radius of each of the seven male beagles for three weeks, and one implant from each group was placed in the contralateral radius for six weeks. After sacrifice, bone-to-implant contact (BIC) and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO) were assessed. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy showed decreased surface levels of carbon and increased Ti and oxygen, and calcium and oxygen, posttreatment for Ti and CaP surfaces, respectively. There was a significant increase in BIC for APP-treated textured Ti surfaces at six weeks but not at three weeks or for CaP surfaces. There were no significant differences for BAFO between treated and untreated surfaces for either material at either time point. This suggests that air-based APP surface treatment may improve osseointegration of textured Ti surfaces but not CaP surfaces. Studies optimizing APP parameters and applications are warranted.