Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Do implants made of polyetheretherketone and its composites have reduced stress shielding effects compared to other dental implant materials? A systematic review

Evidence-Based Dentistry volume 24, pages 193–194 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Purpose

The present systematic review was executed to evaluate the stress shielding effect of PEEK and its composite dental implants as compared to other implant (titanium and zirconia) materials in peri-implant bone.

Materials and method

The comprehensive online literature search was conducted on PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science from January 2011 to January 2023. A total of 43 in vitro studies were identified related to the raised question. In all, 34 studies were excluded as they included in vitro studies focusing on stress distribution in prosthesis framework, abutments, crown, and on biological properties such as cell adhesion, etc. Only eight studies after full-text screening were included in the present systematic review.

Results

The data extracted from included studies showed that PEEK and its composite materials, have a less stress shielding effect due to their low modulus of elasticity resulting in higher stress concentration and strain in the peri-implant bone as compared to titanium and zirconia implant materials.

Conclusion

The PEEK and its composites can be used as an alternative material in the esthetic region and in those who have an allergy to metal implants. However, due to the low elastic modulus of PEEK, a homogenous stress distribution is not observed along the entire length of the implant. Further studies are required to improve the composition of PEEK material so that a homogenous reduction of stress shielding effect along the whole length of a dental implant can be achieved.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: PRISMA (PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items For Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) Flowchart for the review.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hosoki M, Nishigawa K, Miyamoto Y, Ohe G, Matsuka Y. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by titanium screws and dental implants. J Prosthodont Res. 2016;60:213–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2015.12.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kim KT, Eo MY, Nguyen TTH, Kim SM. General review of titanium toxicity. Int J Implant Dent. 2019;5:10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0162-x.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Goutam M, Giriyapura C, Mishra SK, Gupta S. Titanium allergy: a literature review. Indian J Dermatol. 2014;59:630. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5154.143526.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Huiskes R, Ruimerman R, Van Lenthe GH, Janssen JD. Effects of mechanical forces on maintenance and adaptation of form in trabecular bone. Nature. 2000;405:704–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Brown IW, Ring PA. Osteolytic changes in the upper femoral shaft following porous-coated hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1985;67:218–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. van Steenberghe D, Quirynen M, Naert I, Maffei G, Jacobs R. Marginal bone loss around implants retaining hinging mandibular overdentures, at 4-, 8- and 12-years follow-up. J Clin Periodontol. 2001;28:628–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Esposito M, Hirsch JM, Lekholm U, Thomson P. Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. (II). Etiopathogenesis. Eur J Oral Sci. 1998;106:721–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T. Effects of implant surfaces and designs on MBL alterations. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20:207–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lee CK, Karl M, Kelly JR. Evaluation of test protocol variables for dental implant fatigue research. Dent Mater. 2009;25:1419–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wiskott HW, Nicholls JI, Belser UC. Stress fatigue: basic principles and prosthodontic implications. Int J Prosthodont. 1995;8:105–16.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Geng JP, Tan KBC, Liu GR. Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent. 2001;85:585–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fabris D, Moura JPA, Fredel MC, Souza JCM, Silva FS, Henriques B. Biomechanical analyses of one-piece dental implants composed of titanium, zirconia, PEEK, CFR-PEEK, or GFR-PEEK: Stresses, strains, and bone remodeling prediction by the finite element method. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2022;110:79–88. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.34890.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 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;48:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2014.11.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee W-T, Koak J-Y, Lim Y-J, Kim S-K, Kwon H-B, Kim M-J. Stress shielding and fatigue limits of polyether-ether-ketone dental implants. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2012;100B:1044–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Haseeb SA, Vinaya KC, Vijaykumar N, Sree Durga BA, Kumar AS, Sruthi MK. Finite element evaluation to compare stress pattern in bone surrounding implant with carbon fiberreinforced poly-ether-ether-ketone and commercially pure titanium implants. Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2022;13:243–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Mourya A, Nahar R, Mishra SK, Chowdhary R. Stress distribution around different abutments on titanium and CFR-PEEK implant with different prosthetic crowns under parafunctional loading: A 3D FEA study. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2021;11:313–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobcr.2021.03.005.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Tamrakar SK, Mishra SK, Chowdhary R, Rao S. Comparative analysis of stress distribution around CFR-PEEK implants and titanium implants with different prosthetic crowns: a finite element analysis. Dent Med Probl. 2021;58:359–67. https://doi.org/10.17219/dmp/133234.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sarot JR, Contar CM, Cruz AC, de Souza Magini R. Evaluation of the stress distribution in CFR-PEEK dental implants by the three-dimensional finite element method. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2010;21:2079–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-010-4084-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kurtz SM, Devine JN. PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials. 2007;28:4845–69.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Carpenter RD, Klosterhoff BS, Torstrick FB, Foley KT, Burkus JK, Lee CSD, et al. Effect of porous orthopaedic implant material and structure on load sharing with simulated bone ingrowth: A finite element analysis comparing titanium and PEEK. Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials 2018;80:68–76.

  21. Qin W, Li Y, Ma J, Liang Q, Tang B. Mechanical properties and cytotoxicity of hierarchical carbon fiber-reinforced poly (ether-ether-ketone) composites used as implant materials. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2019;89:227–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kurtz SM, Devine JN. PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic and spinal implants. Biomaterials. 2007;28:4845–69.

  23. Minatel L, Verri FR, Kudo GAH, de Faria Almeida DA, de Souza Batista VE, Lemos CAA, et al. Effect of different types of prosthetic platforms on stress-distribution in dental implantsupported prostheses. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2017;71:35–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Faverani LP, Barão VA, Ramalho-Ferreira G, Delben JA, Ferreira MB, Garcia Júnior IR, et al. The influence of bone quality on the biomechanical behavior of full-arch implant-supported fixed prostheses. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2014;37:164–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Frost HM. A 2003 update of bone physiology and Wolff’s Law for clinicians. Angle Orthod. 2004;74:3–15.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Liu T, Chen Y, Apicella A, Mu Z, Yu T, Huang Y, et al. Effect of porous microstructures on the biomechanical characteristics of a root analogue implant: an animal study and a finite element analysis. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2020;6:6356–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Schwitalla AD, Zimmermann T, Spintig T, Kallage I, Müller WD. Fatigue limits of different PEEK materials for dental implants. Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials. 2017;69:163–8.

  28. Bataineh K, Al Janaideh M. Effect of different biocompatible implant materials on the mechanical stability of dental implants under excessive oblique load. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019;21:1206–17.

  29. Georgiopoulos B, Kalioras K, Provatidis C, Manda M, Koidis P. The effects of implant length and diameter prior to and after osseointegration: a 2-D finite element analysis. J Oral Implantol. 2007;33:243–56. https://doi.org/10.1563/1548-1336(2007)33[243:teoila]2.0.co;2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Pessoa RS, Muraru L, Júnior EM, Vaz LG, Sloten JV, Duyck J, et al. Influence of implant connection type on the biomechanical environment of immediately placed implants - CT-based nonlinear, three-dimensional finite element analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2010;12:219–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00155.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Pashley DH, Agee KA, Wataha JC, Rueggeberg F, Ceballos L, Itou K, et al. Viscoelastic properties of demineralized dentin matrix. Dental Mater. 2003;19:700–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Sheets CG, Earthmann JC. Natural tooth intrusion and reversal in implant-assisted prosthesis: evidence of and a hypothesis for the occurrence. J Prosthet Dent. 1993;70:513–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mobilio N, Stefanoni F, Contiero P, Mollica F, Catapano S. Experimental and numeric stress analysis of titanium and zirconia one-piece dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013;28:e135–42. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2335.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge, People’s Dental Academy, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India

    Varsha Verma & Puja Hazari

  2. School of Humanities and Engineering Sciences, MIT Academy of Engineering, Alandi, Pune, Maharashtra, India

    Puja Verma

Authors
  1. Varsha Verma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Puja Hazari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Puja Verma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

VV: concept design, data collection, data analysis and interpretation, drafting of article, critical revision, and approval of article. PH: data analysis and interpretation, drafting of article, critical revision, and approval of article. PV: drafting of article, critical revision, and approval of article.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Varsha Verma.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Verma, V., Hazari, P. & Verma, P. Do implants made of polyetheretherketone and its composites have reduced stress shielding effects compared to other dental implant materials? A systematic review. Evid Based Dent 24, 193–194 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-023-00935-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-023-00935-y

Search

Advanced search

Quick links