Next Article in Journal
Flexural Toughness Test and Inversion Research on a Thermal Conductivity Formula on Steel Fiber-Reinforced Concrete Components Post-Fire
Next Article in Special Issue
Sol–Gel Synthesis of Endodontic Cements: Post-Synthesis Treatment to Improve Setting Performance and Bioactivity
Previous Article in Journal
Role of Gypsum Content on the Long-Term Performance of Lime-Stabilised Soil
Previous Article in Special Issue
Remineralization Efficacy of Four Remineralizing Agents on Artificial Enamel Lesions: SEM-EDS Investigation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Materials
Volume 15
Issue 15
10.3390/ma15155100
materials-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Electrical Potentiometry with Intraoral Applications

by
Alfonso Jornet-García
,
Arturo Sanchez-Perez
*,
José María Montoya-Carralero
and
María José Moya-Villaescusa
Department of Periodontology, Medicine and Dentistry Faculty, Murcia University, 30008 Murcia, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Materials 2022, 15(15), 5100; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15155100
Submission received: 23 June 2022 / Revised: 9 July 2022 / Accepted: 21 July 2022 / Published: 22 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Novel Biomaterials and Technology for Dental Clinical Applications)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Dental implants currently in use are mainly made of titanium or titanium alloys. As these metallic elements are immersed in an electrolytic medium, galvanic currents are produced between them or with other metals present in the mouth. These bimetallic currents have three potentially harmful effects on the patient: micro-discharges, corrosion, and finally, the dispersion of metal ions or their oxides, all of which have been extensively demonstrated in vitro. In this original work, a system for measuring the potentials generated in vivo is developed. Specifically, it is an electrogalvanic measurements system coupled with a periodontal probe that allows measurement of the potentials in the peri-implant sulcus. This device was tested and verified in vitro to guarantee its applicability in vivo. As a conclusion, this system is able to detect galvanic currents in vitro and it can be considered capable of being employed in vivo, so to assess the effects they may cause on dental implants.

1. Introduction

“Galvanism” is named after the Italian physician Luigi Galvani (1737–1798) (Gillispie) [1], who was the first to describe the effects of electrical currents on living tissues. In dentistry, the term “galvanism” is used to describe the electrical currents that are established between metals of different characteristics.
Galvanism has long been associated with various oral manifestations, such as pain or metallic taste [2], leukoplakia [3], lichen planus [4], and toxic or allergic reactions to corrosion products [5]. Recently, it was also identified as a possible cause of implant loss [6].
These currents are established when two or more different metals with different electrical potentials are placed in the oral medium, forming an electrochemical cell. In this way, oxidation on the surface of one metal (the anode) and reduction on that of the other (the cathode) occur. This exchange occurs through saliva, which acts as an electrolyte. Both metals then interact, as shown in Figure 1.
For more than 70 years, commercial pure titanium implants (Ti implants) have been used to replace missing teeth [7]. Dental implants have been shown to be a reliable option for tooth loss with high survival and success rates [8]. Therefore, their use has become widespread, although they are not without complications [9]. These complications can lead to implant loss, which is usually attributed to both biological and mechanical factors and a combination of local and systemic factors [9,10].
Commercial pure titanium (cp-Ti) and titanium alloys (typically Ti6Al4V) display excellent corrosion resistance and biocompatibility. Although zirconium implants are available, this study focused on titanium and its alloys because these are the most frequently used implants.
Several studies have shown that Ti implants inserted into bone can continuously release Ti particles [11,12]. This degradation of the Ti implant depends on the oral environment, which can be highly corrosive in different ways (Figure 2), affecting the behaviour of the implant and its prosthesis and releasing Ti particles [13,14,15,16,17].
These Ti particles can enhance the expression of inflammatory cytokines by activating osteoclasts, macrophages, and neutrophils [14,15,18,19,20].
Most studies on the effect of corrosion have been performed in vitro due to the difficulty in developing a measurement system that can be used intraorally [21,22].
The purpose of this study was to develop a system for measuring galvanic currents that would allow us to perform accurate measurements in the oral cavity. On the other hand, we also sought to compare the new device with a reference electrode.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

An HI 9025 pH meter (Hanna Instruments SL, Eibar, Municipality of Eibar, Spain) 07was used to measure the electrical potentials on the surface of the implants (Figure 3). Its main characteristics can be found at the following link: http://www.ictsl.net/productos/aparatos/phmetroportatilhi9024yhi9025hanna.html (accessed on 7 June 2022).
For the measuring electrode, an original “periodontal electrode” was designed. This electrode consists of a reference electrode (model ME 402; Radiometer Analytical SA, France) (Figure 4a) connected to a stainless steel periodontal probe (periodontal probe #8 handle #6 Qulix 3-6-8-11; Hu-Friedy) (Figure 4b) that acts as a contact electrode. To validate this electrode, it was compared with an oxidation–reduction potential (ORP) combined electrode with a platinum tip and an integrated reference electrode (model HI 3131P; Hanna Instruments SL, Eibar, Spain) (Figure 4c).
All measurements were made at 37 ± 0.5 °C in a Precisterm Selecta Model 6,000,137 thermostatic bath (Laboquimia, Lardero, La Rioja, Spain). The temperature was checked with an HI 7669/2W temperature probe (Laboquimia, Lardero, La Rioja, Spain) and an HI 9025 pH metre (Laboquimia, Lardero, La Rioja, Spain).
To simulate oral conditions, an artificial saliva bath was used according to the formula shown in Table 1.

2.2. Method

The potentiometry measurements were performed in and validated by a simulation in a bath with artificial saliva. In this way, the range of possible values was evaluated in vitro and the measurement method was fine-tuned.
A total of 50 measurements (25 with each electrode) were made on 25 samples of titanium implants, each 12 mm long and 3.75 mm wide (Microdent System, Barcelona, Spain).
The electrodes were maintained using a series of storage, calibration, and disinfection solutions.
The ME 402 reference electrode was stored upright in a saturated solution of KCl (potassium chloride), ref. S21M010 (Radiometer Analytical SA, Villeurbanne Cedex, France), and the vent hole was protected from the environment. Before each potentiometry measurement, the electrodes and the measuring instrument were checked with a 468 mV (25 °C) Redox Pattern solution (Crison, code 9410, Barcelona, Spain). Before and after each measurement, we cleaned the electrochemical probes with RENOVO.N (S16M001; Hach Lange, Berlin, Germany) electrode cleaning solution (potassium hydroxide).
To calibrate the pH scale of the pH metre, we used two buffer solutions, both from Crison (Barcelona, Spain): one at pH 4.01 (25 °C; code 9463) and one at pH 7.00 (25 °C; code 9464).
Finally, Terg-A-Zyme, an enzymatic detergent (1304; Alconox, Inc., New York, NY, USA) was used to clean all the instruments once the in vitro study was completed and before and after each clinical measurement.
To validate the measurement method, the measurements were repeated 25 times by the same observer under identical conditions; measurements with absolute difference from the mean of more than 5% were considered poor and rejected.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis of the data collected in this study was carried out using the statistical package SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences), version 25.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). This software was also used to perform the following procedures: descriptive statistics, frequency analysis, and Student’s t-test. p < 0.05 was accepted as statistically significant.

3. Results

A total of 50 measurements were performed (25 with each electrode) for 25 samples of Microdent System titanium implants measuring 12 mm in length and 3.75 mm in width. These measurements were performed in artificial saliva at 37 ± 0.5 °C, yielding the following results:
Both the combined electrode and the periodontal electrode recorded an absolute potential value of approximately 243.26 mV (CI 95% 232.43–254.09). The mean for the combined electrode was 210.28 mV (CI 95%205.09–215.47), and that for the periodontal electrode was 276.24 mV (CI 95% 266.64–285.84). Table 2 presents the descriptive analysis of the electrical potential value for the combined and periodontal electrode in terms of central tendency, dispersion, position, asymmetry, and kurtosis (Table 2)
The expected values were normal in both cases and demonstrated similar normal Q–Q plots (Figure 5).
The box plots of the electrodes show a wider dispersion for the periodontic electrode potential, but the values are higher than those of the combined electrode (Figure 6).
These differences were statistically significant according to the paired Student’s t-test (Table 3).
It is worth mentioning that the relative values were negative for the combined electrode and positive for the periodontal electrode, so the analysis was performed with the absolute values.

4. Discussion

Titanium (Ti) is characterized by its resistance to corrosion because it forms an oxide layer that protects its interior. This phenomenon is called “passivation” [23].
Despite the presence of this outer layer, there is some evidence that Ti implants can release Ti particles slowly but continuously [24]. The importance of these particles seems to be key to the local response of the organism [25,26,27]. Previous studies have verified a concentration gradient of particles in the tissue, with higher concentrations observed closer to the implant [24,28,29].
The progressive accumulation of these particles, due to their low solubility, can cause a response that triggers the loss of bone around the implant and finally, the loss of the implant itself [30]. The mechanism by which this local accumulation of particles can trigger the onset and progression of peri-implantitis continues to be unclear. As previously described, reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation could be responsible for the recruitment of neutrophils. However, the physiological purpose of this oxidative regulatory mechanism remains unknown [31]. Ultimately, this process results in an imbalance between osteoblasts and osteoclasts [32].
As mentioned above, although the highest concentration is local to the implant, the effects of Ti particles can also be seen at the systemic level [11,12]. Small concentrations have been found in distant organs, such as the lung, liver, spleen, and kidneys [12]. However, in general, they do not produce a systemic immune response [24].
One of the causes potentially influencing the release of Ti particles is corrosion due to the formation of electrical potentials, which can determine their local accumulation [33,34,35] (Figure 7).
The system was able to quantify the electrical potentials that can be generated around dental implants through the use of Evans diagrams. In this way, it was possible to determine both the intensity of the electric currents and the rate of the corrosive reactions. It can be considered that these measurements can be useful for reducing corrosion and preventing the appearance of subsequent complications.
The measurement system is similar to those used by other researchers, such as Sutow et al. and Muller et al. [21,22], to record the electrical potentials of metal restorations. However, the adaptation of a periodontal probe provides us with clinical advantages such as the ability to record electrical potentials within the gingival sulcus.
This new method opens numerous avenues of study, including identification of the processes that develop inside the periodontal groove of restored teeth, quantification of the electrical activity that occurs in the peri-implant groove, and assessment of the relationship between oral electrical potentials and oral diseases attributed to galvanism (pain, oral lichen, and leukoplakia, among others) [2,3,4,5].
Multiple factors can facilitate the release of these particles, including the surface treatment of the implant, friction during implant insertion, corrosion of the implant surface, friction at the implant–abutment interface, the tissue microenvironment, implantoplasty, and the method used for implant surface detoxification [30,36]. Among these, corrosion and friction wear have been mentioned as particularly important causes [37,38].
The effect of corrosion is considered inevitable for almost all existing metal implants [39]. As mentioned above, this release will last for years [40]. However, its intensity is influenced by the oral environment, in which both the temperature and the pH of the saliva play a prominent role, and even by certain bacteria that are capable of eroding the titanium layer, releasing Ti particles [6].
To understand this effect, it should be considered that a dental implant is submerged in saliva, favouring the creation of a galvanic cell and therefore causing an electrolytic effect on the surface of the implant [33]. This effect facilitates the release of Ti particles in the surrounding tissues [34,35]. In extreme situations, when this environment is maintained for years, a loss of strength can occur in the implant core [41], which can lead to a catastrophic failure, culminating with fracture of the implant itself [42].
As mentioned above, any factor that alters the saliva will have a potential effect on implant corrosion and release of Ti particles [43,44]. Therefore, our first objective was to verify the feasibility of the procedure in a controlled environment.
To establish the usefulness of the proposed system, a medium was used that reproduces artificial saliva and allows us to control the pH and temperature. The results support the use of this method; we recorded electrical potentials with the periodontal electrode similar to those of other authors, with a mean value of 276.24 mV (CI 215.47–285.84). These values can be greater in polymetallic conditions, that is, when more than one metal is present in the oral cavity, such as with old amalgam fillings, superstructures or abutments of different compositions [45].
Another variable to consider is the composition of Ti implants manufactured with titanium alloys. Specifically, Cai et al. measured the in vitro open circuit potential (OCP) of four different titanium alloys with three different surface treatments. Their results show that the electrical potential of uncoupled titanium alloys varied from 85 mV to 205 mV [46].
The results agree with the ones of that study, although the influence of temperature seems to be of such importance that it should be taken into account when determining the potential. Other authors even determined that metallic combinations may pose a greater risk, so they established a series of clinical guidelines for the use of combination metallic restorations [47].
Among the immediate applications of this measurement method are the in vitro study of the factors that can modify the electrical potential of titanium implants (such as the surface area, implant length and diameter, restorative material, medium or temperature variations) and the in vivo study of the electrical potential of dental implants subjected to load, as well as the relationship between this potential and variables such as bone loss or peri-implant inflammation. In conclusion, this system is capable of measurements in the 250Mvolt range and can be used in vivo on patients with implants. This will allow to study the possible effect of corrosion on bone loss around implants.

Limitations

The measurement of electrical potentials includes errors that are inherent to the electrical circuit. One of the main sources of error is the drop in IR of the measurement circuit, where I is the current and R is the total resistance. The total resistance of the circuit includes the resistance of the voltmeter, all contact resistances, the resistance of the electrolytes, and the resistance of the tissues between the reference electrode and the measurement electrode [48]. However, despite all the errors inherent to the circuit, the clinical measurement of the electrical potential of metal restorations showed high reproducibility: differences of only 2 mV were obtained across three independent measurements at intervals of 5 s [20].
It should also be noted that the behavior of the galvanic currents will depend on the material used (Soares and Stich) [49,50], the treatment of peri-implantitis (Lozano and Verdeguer) [51,52], as well as the development of future materials; therefore, the study of Ti particles and their effect must be taken into account (Gürbüz-Urvasızoğlu G) [53] at least until new particle-free materials become available (Nagay) [54].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.J.-G. and A.S.-P.; methodology, A.J.-G. and A.S.-P.; software, A.J.-G. validation, J.M.M.-C. and M.J.M.-V.; formal analysis, A.S.-P.; investigation, A.J.-G.; resources, A.J.-G.; data curation, A.S.-P.; writing—original draft preparation, A.J.-G., J.M.M.-C. and M.J.M.-V.; writing—review and editing, A.S.-P.; visualization, A.J.-G., A.S.-P., J.M.M.-C. and M.J.M.-V.; supervision, A.S.-P.; project administration, A.S.-P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data of this study are available to readers upon request to the corresponding author ([email protected]) in Excel format.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the company Microdent Implant System (Microdent, 08018 Barcelona, Spain) for providing the implants for the study and the abutments, without any additional financial contribution.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Gillispie, C. Complete Dictionary of Scientific Biography; Charles Scribner’s Sons: Detroit, MI, USA, 2008; Volume 9, ISBN 9780684315591. [Google Scholar]
  2. Axéll, T.; Nilner, K.; Nilsson, B. Clinical evaluation of patients referred with symptoms related to oral galvanism. Swed. Dent. J. 1983, 7, 169–178. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  3. Inovay, J.; Bánóczy, J. The role of electrical potential differences in the etiology of chronic diseases of the oral mucosa. J. Dent. Res. 1961, 40, 884–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bánóczy, J.; Roed-Petersen, B.; Pindborg, J.J.; Inovay, J. Clinical and histologic studies on electrogalvanically induced oral white lesions. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. 1979, 48, 319–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. van Loon, L.A.; van Elsas, P.W.; van Joost, T.; Davidson, C.L. Contact stomatitis and dermatitis to nickel and palladium. Contact Dermat. 1984, 11, 294–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Rodrigues, D.C.; Valderrama, P.; Wilson, T.G.; Palmer, K.; Thomas, A.; Sridhar, S.; Adapalli, A.; Burbano, M.; Wadhwani, C. Titanium corrosion mechanisms in the oral environment: A retrieval study. Materials 2013, 6, 5258–5274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Brånemark, P.I.; Adell, R.; Breine, U.; Hansson, B.O.; Lindström, J.; Ohlsson, A. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. Experimental studies. Scand. J. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 1969, 3, 81–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Albrektsson, T.; Donos, N. Implant survival and complications. The Third EAO consensus conference 2012. Clin. Oral Implant. Res. 2012, 23, 63–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Lindhe, J.; Meyle, J. Peri-implant diseases: Consensus report of the sixth european workshop on periodontology. J. Clin. Periodontol. 2008, 35, 282–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Cochran, D.L.; Hermann, J.S.; Schenk, R.K.; Higginbottom, F.L.; Buser, D. Biologic width around titanium implants. A histometric analysis of the implanto-gingival junction around unloaded and loaded nonsubmerged implants in the canine mandible. J. Periodontol. 1997, 68, 186–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Berryman, Z.; Bridger, L.; Hussaini, H.M.; Rich, A.M.; Atieh, M.; Tawse-Smith, A. Titanium particles: An emerging risk factor for peri-implant bone loss. Saudi Dent. J. 2020, 32, 283–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Heringa, M.B.; Peters, R.J.B.; Bleys, R.; van der Lee, M.K.; Tromp, P.C.; van Kesteren, P.C.E.; van Eijkeren, J.C.H.; Undas, A.K.; Oomen, A.G.; Bouwmeester, H. Detection of titanium particles in human liver and spleen and possible health implications. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 2018, 15, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Cruz, H.; Souza, J.; Henriques, M.; Rocha, L. Tribocorrosion and bio-tribocorrosion in the oral environment: The case of dental implants. In Biomedical Tribology; Davim, J.P., Ed.; Nova Science Publishers: New York, NY, USA, 2011; pp. 1–33. [Google Scholar]
  14. Souza, J.C.; Barbosa, S.L.; Ariza, E.A.; Henriques, M.; Teughels, W.; Ponthiaux, P.; Celis, J.P.; Rocha, L.A. How do titanium and Ti6Al4V corrode in fluoridated medium as found in the oral cavity? An in vitro study. Mater. Sci. Eng. C Mater. Biol. Appl. 2015, 47, 384–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Juanito, G.M.; Morsch, C.S.; Benfatti, C.A.; Fredel, M.C.; Magini, R.S.; Souza, J.C. Effect of fluoride and bleaching agents on the degradation of titanium: Literature review. Dentistry 2015, 5, 273. [Google Scholar]
  16. Souza, J.C.; Ponthiaux, P.; Henriques, M.; Oliveira, R.; Teughels, W.; Celis, J.P.; Rocha, L.A. Corrosion behaviour of titanium in the presence of Streptococcus mutans. J. Dent. 2013, 41, 528–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  17. Souza, J.C.M.; Henriques, M.; Teughels, W.; Ponthiaux, P.; Celis, J.P.; Rocha, L.A. Wear and corrosion interactions on titanium in oral environment: Literature review. J. Bio-Tribo-Corros. 2015, 1, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Schwarz, F.; Sahm, N.; Mihatovic, I.; Golubovic, V.; Becker, J. Surgical therapy of advanced ligature-induced peri-implantitis defects: Cone-beam computed tomographic and histological analysis. J. Clin. Periodontol. 2011, 38, 939–949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Goodman, S.B. Wear particles, periprosthetic osteolysis and the immune system. Biomaterials 2007, 28, 5044–5048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Urban, R.M.; Jacobs, J.J.; Tomlinson, M.J.; Gavrilovic, J.; Black, J.; Peoc’h, M. Dissemination of wear particles to the liver, spleen, and abdominal lymph nodes of patients with hip or knee replacement. J. Bone Jt. Surg. 2000, 82, 457–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sutow, E.J.; Maillet, W.A.; Taylor, J.C.; Hall, G.C.; Millar, M. Time-dependent corrosion potential of newly-placed admixed dental amalgam restorations. Dent. Mater. 2007, 23, 644–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Muller, A.W.; De Groot, D.A.; Davidson, C.L. The determination of the electrical potential of a metallic restoration in the oral cavity. J. Oral Rehabil. 1989, 16, 271–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Mathew, M.T.; Abbey, S.; Hallab, N.J.; Hall, D.J.; Sukotjo, C.; Wimmer, M.A. Influence of pH on the tribocorrosion behavior of CpTi in the oral environment: Synergistic interactions of wear and corrosion. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. B Appl. Biomater. 2012, 100, 1662–1671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. He, X.; Reichl, F.X.; Wang, Y.; Michalke, B.; Milz, S.; Yang, Y.; Stolper, P.; Lindemaier, G.; Graw, M.; Hickel, R.; et al. Analysis of titanium and other metals in human jawbones with dental implants—A case series study. Dent. Mater. 2016, 32, 1042–1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Moran, M.M.; Wilson, B.M.; Ross, R.D.; Virdi, A.S.; Sumner, D.R. Arthrotomy-based preclinical models of particle-induced osteolysis: A systematic review. J. Orthop. Res. 2017, 35, 2595–2605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Frisken, K.W.; Dandie, G.W.; Lugowski, S.; Jordan, G. A study of titanium release into body organs following the insertion of single threaded screw implants into the mandibles of sheep. Aust. Dent. J. 2002, 47, 214–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Zhang, L.; Haddouti, E.M.; Welle, K.; Burger, C.; Wirtz, D.C.; Schildberg, F.A.; Kabir, K. The effects of biomaterial implant wear debris on osteoblasts. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2020, 8, 352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Curtin, J.P.; Wang, M. Are clinical findings of systemic titanium dispersion following implantation explained by available in vitro evidence? An evidence-based analysis. J. Biol. Inorg. Chem. 2017, 22, 799–806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wang, Q.; Zhou, P.; Liu, S.; Attarilar, S.; Ma, R.L.; Zhong, Y.; Wang, L. Multi-scale surface treatments of titanium implants for rapid osseointegration: A review. Nanomaterials 2020, 10, 1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Suárez-López Del Amo, F.; Garaicoa-Pazmiño, C.; Fretwurst, T.; Castilho, R.M.; Squarize, C.H. Dental implants-associated release of titanium particles: A systematic review. Clin. Oral Implant. Res. 2018, 29, 1085–1100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Bressan, E.; Ferroni, L.; Gardin, C.; Bellin, G.; Sbricoli, L.; Sivolella, S.; Brunello, G.; Schwartz-Arad, D.; Mijiritsky, E.; Penarrocha, M.; et al. Metal nanoparticles released from dental implant surfaces: Potential contribution to chronic inflammation and peri-implant bone loss. Materials 2019, 12, 2036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Yu, B.; Bai, J.; Shi, J.; Shen, J.; Guo, X.; Liu, Y.; Ge, G.; Lin, J.; Tao, Y.; Yang, H.; et al. MiR-106b inhibition suppresses inflammatory bone destruction of wear debris-induced periprosthetic osteolysis in rats. J. Cell. Mol. Med. 2020, 24, 7490–7503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Hjalmarsson, L.; Smedberg, J.I.; Wennerberg, A. Material degradation in implant-retained cobalt-chrome and titanium frameworks. J. Oral Rehabil. 2011, 38, 61–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Henry, P.J. Clinical experiences with dental implants. Adv. Dent. Res. 1999, 13, 147–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Berbel, L.O.; Banczek, E.D.P.; Karoussis, I.K.; Kotsakis, G.A.; Costa, I. Determinants of corrosion resistance of Ti-6Al-4V alloy dental implants in an In Vitro model of peri-implant inflammation. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0210530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Zhou, Z.; Shi, Q.; Wang, J.; Chen, X.; Hao, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, X. The unfavorable role of titanium particles released from dental implants. Nanotheranostics 2021, 5, 321–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Delgado-Ruiz, R.; Romanos, G. Potential causes of titanium particle and ion release in implant dentistry: A systematic review. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 3585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Penmetsa, S.L.D.; Shah, R.; Thomas, R.; Kumar, A.B.T.; Gayatri, P.S.D.; Mehta, D.S. Titanium particles in tissues from peri-implant mucositis: An exfoliative cytology-based pilot study. J. Indian Soc. Periodontol. 2017, 21, 192–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Chapter II 4 4 Degradative Effects of the Biological Environment on Metals and Ceramics 2013 Biomaterials Science Third Edition. Available online: https://es.scribd.com/document/352048599/Chapter-II-4-4-Degradative-Effects-of-the-Biological-Environment-on-Metals-and-Ceramics-2013-Biomaterials-Science-Third-Edition (accessed on 27 May 2022).
  40. Hanawa, T. Metal ion release from metal implants. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2004, 24, 745–752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Gil, F.J.; Canedo, R.; Padrós, A.; Bañeres, M.V.; Arano, J.M. Fretting corrosion behaviour of ball-and-socket joint on dental implants with different prosthodontic alloys. Bio-Med. Mater. Eng. 2003, 13, 27–34. [Google Scholar]
  42. Sánchez-Pérez, A.; Moya-Villaescusa, M.J.; Jornet-Garcia, A.; Gomez, S. Etiology, risk factors and management of implant fractures. Med. Oral Patol. Oral Cir. Bucal 2010, 15, e504–e508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Noguti, J.; de Oliveira, F.; Peres, R.C.; Renno, A.C.; Ribeiro, D.A. The role of fluoride on the process of titanium corrosion in oral cavity. Biometals 2012, 25, 859–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Licausi, M.P.; Igual Muñoz, A.; Amigó Borrás, V. Influence of the fabrication process and fluoride content on the tribocorrosion behaviour of Ti6Al4V biomedical alloy in artificial saliva. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 2013, 20, 137–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Gittens, R.A.; Olivares-Navarrete, R.; Tannenbaum, R.; Boyan, B.D.; Schwartz, Z. Electrical implications of corrosion for osseointegration of titanium implants. J. Dent. Res. 2011, 90, 1389–1397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Cai, Z.; Shafer, T.; Watanabe, I.; Nunn, M.E.; Okabe, T. Electrochemical characterization of cast titanium alloys. Biomaterials 2003, 24, 213–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Venugopalan, R.; Lucas, L.C. Evaluation of restorative and implant alloys galvanically coupled to titanium. Dent. Mater. 1998, 14, 165–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Bard, A.J.; Faulkner, L.R. Electrochemical Methods: Fundamentals and Applications; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  49. Soares, F.M.S.; Elias, C.N.; Monteiro, E.S.; Coimbra, M.E.R.; Santana, A.I.C. Galvanic Corrosion of Ti Dental Implants Coupled to CoCrMo Prosthetic Component. Int. J. Biomater. 2021, 2021, 1313343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Stich, T.; Alagboso, F.; Křenek, T.; Kovářík, T.; Alt, V.; Docheva, D. Implant-bone-interface: Reviewing the impact of titanium surface modifications on osteogenic processes in vitro and in vivo. Bioeng. Transl. Med. 2021, 7, e10239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Lozano, P.; Peña, M.; Herrero-Climent, M.; Rios-Santos, J.V.; Rios-Carrasco, B.; Brizuela, A.; Gil, J. Corrosion Behavior of Titanium Dental Implants with Implantoplasty. Materials 2022, 15, 1563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Verdeguer, P.; Gil, J.; Punset, M.; Manero, J.M.; Nart, J.; Vilarrasa, J.; Ruperez, E. Citric Acid in the Passivation of Titanium Dental Implants: Corrosion Resistance and Bactericide Behavior. Materials 2022, 15, 545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Gürbüz-Urvasızoğlu, G.; Ataol, M.; Özgeriş, F.B. Trace elements released from dental implants with periimplantitis: A cohort study. Ir. J. Med. Sci. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Nagay, B.E.; Cordeiro, J.M.; Barao, V.A.R. Insight into Corrosion of Dental Implants: From Biochemical Mechanisms to Designing Corrosion-Resistant Materials. Curr. Oral Health Rep. 2022, 9, 7–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Materials 15 05100 g001 550
Figure 1. The anode, the metal that is oxidized (M), releases ions (Mn+) to the medium and an equal number of electrons (n) as the valence of these ions (Mn+). The metal that is reduced can incorporate these electrons (e) both on its surface and in its metal lattice by reacting with both hydrogen and oxygen, depending on the medium.
Figure 1. The anode, the metal that is oxidized (M), releases ions (Mn+) to the medium and an equal number of electrons (n) as the valence of these ions (Mn+). The metal that is reduced can incorporate these electrons (e) both on its surface and in its metal lattice by reacting with both hydrogen and oxygen, depending on the medium.
Materials 15 05100 g001
Materials 15 05100 g002 550
Figure 2. Different ways in which a dental implant can corrode and lose its passivated layer.
Figure 2. Different ways in which a dental implant can corrode and lose its passivated layer.
Materials 15 05100 g002
Materials 15 05100 g003 550
Figure 3. The Hanna waterproof instrument, a heavy-duty pH meter designed to provide accurate laboratory results.
Figure 3. The Hanna waterproof instrument, a heavy-duty pH meter designed to provide accurate laboratory results.
Materials 15 05100 g003
Materials 15 05100 g004 550
Figure 4. Different electrodes used in these measurements. (a) Reference electrode suitable for general laboratory use. (b) Stainless steel periodontal probe. (c) Combined electrode with platinum tip and integrated reference electrode.
Figure 4. Different electrodes used in these measurements. (a) Reference electrode suitable for general laboratory use. (b) Stainless steel periodontal probe. (c) Combined electrode with platinum tip and integrated reference electrode.
Materials 15 05100 g004
Materials 15 05100 g005 550
Figure 5. Statistics, Q-Q(quantile-quantile) plots play a ital role to graphically analyze and compare two probability distributions Normal Q–Q plot. (a) Normal distribution of the combination electrode potential in mV. (b) Normal distribution of the periodontic electrode potential in mV.
Figure 5. Statistics, Q-Q(quantile-quantile) plots play a ital role to graphically analyze and compare two probability distributions Normal Q–Q plot. (a) Normal distribution of the combination electrode potential in mV. (b) Normal distribution of the periodontic electrode potential in mV.
Materials 15 05100 g005
Materials 15 05100 g006 550
Figure 6. Box plot of the total bone-to-implant contact (BIC) obtained with control and UVC-treated surfaces. Plots show the lower (Q1), median (Q2), and upper (Q3) quartiles. The whiskers indicate the highest and lowest observations. (a) Box plot of the combination electrode potential in mV. (b) Box plot of the periodontal electrode potential in mV.
Figure 6. Box plot of the total bone-to-implant contact (BIC) obtained with control and UVC-treated surfaces. Plots show the lower (Q1), median (Q2), and upper (Q3) quartiles. The whiskers indicate the highest and lowest observations. (a) Box plot of the combination electrode potential in mV. (b) Box plot of the periodontal electrode potential in mV.
Materials 15 05100 g006
Materials 15 05100 g007 550
Figure 7. Diagram of the different mechanisms capable of causing Ti particle release and rupturing the passivated titanium layer.
Figure 7. Diagram of the different mechanisms capable of causing Ti particle release and rupturing the passivated titanium layer.
Materials 15 05100 g007
Table
Table 1. Composition of the artificial saliva used to conduct the experiments.
Table 1. Composition of the artificial saliva used to conduct the experiments.
Chemical Components of Artificial Saliva
Sodium Biphosphate 200 mgPotassium Chloride 1.2 grPotassium Thiocyanate 330 mg
Sodium Bisphosphate 260 mgSodium Chloride 700 mgSodium Bicarbonate 1.5 gr
Urea 1.5 grPurified water sqt 1000 mlLactic acid sqt pH 6–7
mg = milligrams = grams, ml = millilitres, pH = potential of hydrogen, sqt = “sufficient quantity to”.
Table
Table 2. Descriptive analysis of the electrodes. Results in mV.
Table 2. Descriptive analysis of the electrodes. Results in mV.
StatisticalCombined ElectrodePeriodontal Electrode
Mean276.24−210.28
Lower limit of the CI *266.64−215.47
Upper limit of the CI *285.84−205.09
5% trimmed mean276.63−209.48
Median272−205
Variance540.44157.96
Standard deviation23.2412.56
Minimum233−240
Maximum311−196
Range7844
Interquartile range4315
Asymmetry−0.00−1.07
Kurtosis−1.090.12
* 95% confidence interval for the mean.
Table
Table 3. T-test values. There were statistically significant differences between the two electrodes. The values recorded with the periodontal electrode were higher than those of the combined electrode.
Table 3. T-test values. There were statistically significant differences between the two electrodes. The values recorded with the periodontal electrode were higher than those of the combined electrode.
T-TestT-Test Valuep
Values−189.990.000
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jornet-García, A.; Sanchez-Perez, A.; Montoya-Carralero, J.M.; Moya-Villaescusa, M.J. Electrical Potentiometry with Intraoral Applications. Materials 2022, 15, 5100. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15155100

AMA Style

Jornet-García A, Sanchez-Perez A, Montoya-Carralero JM, Moya-Villaescusa MJ. Electrical Potentiometry with Intraoral Applications. Materials. 2022; 15(15):5100. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15155100

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jornet-García, Alfonso, Arturo Sanchez-Perez, José María Montoya-Carralero, and María José Moya-Villaescusa. 2022. "Electrical Potentiometry with Intraoral Applications" Materials 15, no. 15: 5100. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15155100

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop