PEEK polimerinin protetik diş hekimliğinde kullanımı

Polietereterketon (PEEK) polimeri yarı kristalin termoplastik polimer sınıfının öne çıkan polimerlerinden biridir. PEEK materyali kimyasal ve fiziksel dayanıklılık, biyouyumluluk ve insan kemiğine yakın elastik modülüsü (4 GPa) gibi uygun mekanik özelliklerden dolayı dişhekimliğinde yaygın bir şekilde kullanılmaktadır. Sabit ve hareketli protezlerde alt yapı malzemesi, geçici dayanaklar, iyileşme başlıkları ve dental implantlar gibi pek çok alanda kullanılır. PEEK, kompozit, seramik veya zirkonyaya kıyasla dişhekimliğinde oldukça yeni bir materyal olduğundan, bu materyalin özelliklerini bilmek önemlidir. Bu derlemenin amacı dişhekimliğinde yaygın olarak kullanılan PEEK polimerinin karakteristik özelliklerini değerlendirmektir

PEEK polymer’s use in prosthodontics

The polyetheretherketone (PEEK) polymer is one of the prominent polymers of the semi-crystalline thermoplastic polymer class. PEEK material is widely used in dentistry due to its attractive mechanical properties such as chemical and physical strength, biocompatibility and elastic modulus close to that of human bone (4 GPa). PEEK has been introduced for dental applications, such as fixed prostheses, temporary abutments, healing heads and dental implants. It is important to summarize the properties of PEEK, composites, ceramics or zirconia as they are quite new material in dentistry. The aim of this study is to review polyetheretherketone (PEEK), its characteristics and use in prosthodontics

PDF

___

1. Chen F, Ou H, Lu B, Long H. A constitutive model of polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK). Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials. 2016; 53: 427-33.
2. Kalayci E, Avinç O, Yavaş A. Polyether Ether Ketone (PEEK) Fibers. Cumhuriyet Science Journal. 2017; 38(2): 168.
3. Hearle JW. Physical structure and fibre properties. Regen Cellul Fibres. 2001; 18.
4. Staniland PA, Wilde CJ, Bottino FA, Di Pasquale G, Pollicino A, Recca A. Synthesis, characterization and study of the thermal properties of new polyarylene ethers. Polymer. 1992; 33(9): 1976-81.
5. Feerick EM, Kennedy J, Mullett H, FitzPatrick D, McGarry P. Investigation of metallic and carbon fibre PEEK fracture fixation devices for three-part proximal humeral fractures. Med Eng Phys. 2013; 35(6): 712-22.
6. Kurtz SM, Devine JN. PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials. 2007; 28(32): 4845-69.
7. Zhou L, Qian Y, Zhu Y, Liu H, Gan K, Guo J. The effect of different surface treatments on the bond strength of PEEK composite materials. Dent Mater. 2014; 30(8): e209–e215.
8. Sagomonyants KB, Jarman-Smith ML, Devine JN, Aronow MS, Gronowicz GA. The in vitro response of human osteoblasts to polyetheretherketone (PEEK) substrates compared to commercially pure titanium. Biomaterials. 2008; 29(11): 1563-72.
9. Külünk T, Külünk Ş, Saraç D. Diş Hekimliği Uygulamalarında Polietereterketon. Turk Klin J Prosthodont-Spec Top. 2017; 3(3): 175-83.
10.Liebermann A, Wimmer T, Schmidlin PR, Scherer H, Löffler P, Roos M, et al. Physicomechanical characterization of polyetheretherketone and current esthetic dental CAD/CAM polymers after aging in different storage media. J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 115(3): 321-328.
11.Skirbutis G. A review of PEEK polymer’s properties and its use in prosthodontics. 2017; 19(1): 5.
12.Skinner HB. Composite technology for total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop. 1988; (235): 224-36.
13.Lee W-T, Koak J-Y, Lim Y-J, Kim S-K, Kwon H-B, Kim M-J. Stress shielding and fatigue limits of poly-ether-ether-ketone dental implants. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2012; 100B(4): 1044- 52.
14.Rahmitasari F, Ishida Y, Kurahashi K, Matsuda T, Watanabe M, Ichikawa T. PEEK with Reinforced Materials and Modifications for Dental Implant Applications. Dent J. 2017; 5(4).
15.Najeeb S, Zafar MS, Khurshid Z, Siddiqui F. Applications of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) in oral implantology and prosthodontics. J Prosthodont Res. 2016; 60(1): 12-9.
16.Branemark P-I, Breine U, Adell R, Hansson BO, Lindström J, Ohlsson Å. Intra-Osseous Anchorage of Dental Prostheses: I. Experimental Studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 1969; 3(2): 81.
17.Shapira L, Klinger A, Tadir A, Wilensky A, Halabi A. Effect of a niobium-containing titanium alloy on osteoblast behavior in culture. Clınıcal Oral Implants Research. 2009; (6): 578.
18.Egusa H, Ko N, Shimazu T, Yatani H. Suspected association of an allergic reaction with titanium dental implants: A clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2008; 100(5): 344-7.
19.Huiskes R, Weinans H, Rietbergen B van. The relationship between stress shielding and bone resorption around total hip stems and the effects of flexible materials. Clin Orthop. 1992; 124-34.
20.Yildirim M, Fischer H, Marx R, Edelhoff D. In vivo fracture resistance of implant-supported allceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 90(4): 325-31.
21.Sandhaus S. [Oral rehabilitation using implantation method C.B.S. ZWR. 1971; 80(13): 597-604.
22.Özkurt Z, Kazazoğlu E. Zirconia Dental Implants: A Literature Review. J Oral Implantol. 2010; 37(3): 367-76.
23.Andreiotelli M, Wenz HJ, Kohal R-J. Are ceramic implants a viable alternative to titanium implants? A systematic literature review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009; 20(s4): 32-47.
24.Kelsey DJ, Springer GS, Goodman SB. Composite Implant for Bone Replacement. J Compos Mater. 1997; 31(16): 1593-632.
25.Abu Bakar MS, Cheng MHW, Tang SM, Yu SC, Liao K, Tan CT, vd. Tensile properties, tension– tension fatigue and biological response of polyetheretherketone–hydroxyapatite composites for load-bearing orthopedic implants. Biomaterials. 2003; 24(13): 2245-50.
26.Sarot JR, Contar CMM, Cruz ACC da, Magini R de S. Evaluation of the stress distribution in CFRPEEK dental implants by the three-dimensional finite element method. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2010; 21(7): 2079-85.
27.Schwitalla AD, Abou-Emara M, Spintig T, Lackmann J, Müller WD. Finite element analysis of the biomechanical effects of PEEK dental implants on the peri-implant bone. J Biomech. 2015; 48(1): 1-7.
28.Rivard C-H, Rhalmi S, Coillard C. In vivo biocompatibility testing of PEEK polymer for a spinal implant system: A study in rabbits. J Biomed Mater Res. 2002; 62(4): 488-98.
29.Najeeb S, Khurshid Z, Matinlinna JP, Siddiqui F, Nassani MZ, Baroudi K. Nanomodified PEEK dental implants: Bioactive composites and surface modification—A review. Int J Dent. 2015;2015.
30.Marchand-Brynaert J, Pantano G, Noiset O. Surface fluorination of PEEK film by selective wetchemistry. Polymer. 1997;38(6):1387-94.
31.Noiset O, Schneider Y-J, Marchand–Brynaert J. Surface modification of poly(aryl ether ether ketone) (PEEK) film by covalent coupling of amines and amino acids through a spacer arm. J Polym Sci Part Polym Chem. 1997; 35(17): 3779- 90.
32.Almasi D, Iqbal N, Sadeghi M, Sudin I, Kadir A, Rafiq M, vd. Preparation methods for improving PEEK’s bioactivity for orthopedic and dental application: a review. Int J Biomater. 2016; 2016.
33.Wang H, Lu T, Meng F, Zhu H, Liu X. Enhanced osteoblast responses to poly ether ether ketone surface modified by water plasma immersion ion implantation. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces. 2014; 117: 89-97.
34.Waser-Althaus J, Salamon A, Waser M, Padeste C, Kreutzer M, Pieles U, vd. Differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells on plasma-treated polyetheretherketone. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2014; 25(2): 515-25.
35.Ha S-W, Kirch M, Birchler F, Eckert K-L, Mayer J, Wintermantel E, vd. Surface activation of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and formation of calcium phosphate coatings by precipitation. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 1997; 8(11): 683-90.
36.Riveiro A, Soto R, Comesaña R, Boutinguiza M, del Val J, Quintero F, vd. Laser surface modification of PEEK. Appl Surf Sci. 2012; 258(23): 9437-42.
37.Khoury J, Kirkpatrick SR, Maxwell M, Cherian RE, Kirkpatrick A, Svrluga RC. Neutral atom beam technique enhances bioactivity of PEEK. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res Sect B Beam Interact Mater At. 2013; 307: 630-4.
38.Mathieson I, Bradley RH. Improved adhesion to polymers by UV/ozone surface oxidation. Int J Adhes Adhes. 1996; 16(1): 29-31.
39.Ogle OE. Implant Surface Material, Design, and Osseointegration. Dent Clin North Am. 2015; 59(2): 505-20.
40.Wang L, He S, Wu X, Liang S, Mu Z, Wei J, vd. Polyetheretherketone/nano-fluorohydroxyapatite composite with antimicrobial activity and osseointegration properties. Biomaterials. 2014; 35(25): 6758-75.
41.Schwitalla AD, Abou-Emara M, Zimmermann T, Spintig T, Beuer F, Lackmann J, vd. The applicability of PEEK-based ment screws. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2016; 63: 244-51.
42.Koutouzis T, Richardson J, Lundgren T. Comparative Soft and Hard Tissue Responses to Titanium and Polymer Healing Abutments. Journal Of Oral Implantology. 2011; (SPI): 174.
43.Hahnel S, Wieser A, Lang R, Rosentritt M. Biofilm formation on the surface of modern implant abutment materials. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(11): 1297-301.
44.Gómez-Moreno G, Pérez-Albacete Martínez C, Ramírez-Fernández MP, Granero-Marín JM, Gehrke SA, Calvo-Guirado JL. Peri-implant tissue behavior around non-titanium material: Experimental study in dogs. Ann Anat - Anat Anz. 2016; 206: 104-9.
45.Siewert B, Parra M. A new group of material in dentistry: PEEK as a framework material used in 12-piece implant-supported bridges. Z Zahnarztliche Implantol. 2013; 148-59.
46.Rzanny A, Gobel F, Fachet M. BioHPP summary of results for material tests. Research Report. 2013;
47.Tannous F, Steiner M, Shahin R, Kern M. Retentive forces and fatigue resistance of thermoplastic resin clasps. Dent Mater. 2012; 28(3): 273-8.
48.Zoidis P, Papathanasiou I, Polyzois G. The Use of a Modified Poly-Ether-Ether-Ketone (PEEK) as an Alternative Framework Material for Removable Dental Prostheses. A Clinical Report. J Prosthodont-Implant Esthet Reconstr Dent. 2016; 25(7): 580-4.
49.Adler S, Kistler S, Kistler F, Lermer J, Neugebauer J. Compression-moulding rather than milling: a wealth of possible applications for high performance polymers. Quintessenz Zahntech. 2013; 39: 376–84.
50.Costa-Palau S, Torrents-Nicolas J, Brufau-de Barberà M, Cabratosa-Termes J. Use of polyetheretherketone in the fabrication of a maxillary obturator prosthesis: A clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 112(3): 680-2.
51.Stawarczyk B, Beuer F, Wimmer T, Jahn D, Sener B, Roos M, vd. Polyetheretherketone—A suitable material for fixed dental prostheses? J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2013; 101(7): 1209- 16.
52.Stawarczyk B, Thrun H, Eichberger M, Roos M, Edelhoff D, Schweiger J, vd. Effect of different surface pretreatments and adhesives on the loadbearing capacity of veneered 3-unit PEEK FDPs. J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114(5): 666-73.
53.Schwitalla AD, Bötel F, Zimmermann T, Sütel M, Müller W-D. The impact of argon/oxygen lowpressure plasma on shear bond strength between a veneering composite and different PEEK materials. Dent Mater. 2017; 33(9): 990-4.
54.Stawarczyk B, Jordan P, Schmidlin PR, Roos M, Eichberger M, Gernet W, vd. PEEK surface treatment effects on tensile bond strength to veneering resins. J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 112(5): 1278-88.
55.55. Kern M, Lehmann F. Influence of surface conditioning on bonding to polyetheretherketon (PEEK). Dent Mater. 2012; 28(12): 1280-3.
56.56. Ha S-W, Hauert R, Ernst K-H, Wintermantel E. Surface analysis of chemically-etched and plasmatreated polyetheretherketone (PEEK) for biomedical applications. Surf Coat Technol. 1997; 96(2): 293-9.