Home Print this page Email this page   Users Online: 77


Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 

 Table of Contents  
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 4  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 41-42

Polyetheretherketone implants: Can they replace titanium in future

1 Department of Maxillofacial Prosthodontics and Implantology, People's College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India
2 Branemark Osseointegration Centre India, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
3 Department of Maxillofacial Prosthodontics and Implantology, People's Dental Academy, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India

Date of Web Publication14-Sep-2016

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Sunil Kumar Mishra
Department of Maxillofacial Prosthodontics and Implantology, People's College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/2347-4610.190612

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Mishra SK, Chowdhary R, Hazari P. Polyetheretherketone implants: Can they replace titanium in future. Eur J Prosthodont 2016;4:41-2

How to cite this URL:
Mishra SK, Chowdhary R, Hazari P. Polyetheretherketone implants: Can they replace titanium in future. Eur J Prosthodont [serial online] 2016 [cited 2018 Jun 29];4:41-2. Available from: http://www.eurjprosthodont.org/text.asp?2016/4/2/41/190612


The placement of titanium (Ti) dental implants can be associated with complications such as hypersensitivity to Ti in some patients. There are studies which show Ti as an allergen, but the resources to diagnose Ti sensitivity are very limited. [1] Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is an organic synthetic polymeric tooth-colored material which can be placed in patients allergic to Ti and also it is a more esthetic dental implant material. In the current research, a lot of work is being done on PEEK implants to replace the traditional Ti implants since it has a lower elastic modulus than Ti. In its pure form, Young's modulus of PEEK is around 3.6 GPa which is close to that of the cortical bone. Reinforced PEEK material as abutment has high rate of biocompatibility, and it also preserves bone height and maintains the soft tissue stability. [2]

The long-term success of dental implants mainly relies on stable osseointegration as well as how well the implant surfaces integrate with the surrounding soft tissues. The bioinert property of PEEK implants and its defective osseointegration limits its clinical use as load-bearing dental material. To overcome this problem, researcher had developed PEEK bioactive ternary composite, PEEK/nano-hydroxyapatite/carbon fiber (PEEK/n-HA/CF) and had done the in vivo evaluation of osseointegration by assessment of growth and differentiation of osteoblast-like MG63 cells. They found that PEEK/n-HA/CF ternary biocomposite with enhanced mechanics and biological performances hold great potential as bioactive implant material. [3] Recently, Ti plasma immersion ion implantation technique was applied to modify the carbon fiber-reinforced PEEK (CFR-PEEK) surface, constructing a unique multilevel Ti dioxide (TiO 2 ) nanostructure thus, enhancing certain osteogenic properties. The multilevel TiO 2 nanostructures can selectively enhance soft tissue integration and inhibit bacterial reproduction, which will further support and broaden the adoption of CFR-PEEK materials in the dental fields. [4] Static pressure tests with PEEK materials of unfilled grades, grades filled with TiO 2 powder, grades filled with barium sulfate powder, grades reinforced with short carbon fibers, grades reinforced with glass fibers, and grades reinforced with continuous carbon fibers were done with the maximum bite force of a first molar, and all tested materials seem to be suitable for the use as dental implants. [5]

More extensive research of PEEK implants on animals and humans is still required to find out its long-term success and to conclude that it is the future implant material which is going to replace Ti implants with reduced cost and enhanced clinical success.

Financial support and sponsorship


Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

  References Top

Goutam M, Giriyapura C, Mishra SK, Gupta S. Titanium allergy: A literature review. Indian J Dermatol 2014;59:630.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
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;2015:381759.  Back to cited text no. 2
Deng Y, Zhou P, Liu X, Wang L, Xiong X, Tang Z, et al. Preparation, characterization, cellular response and in vivo osseointegration of polyetheretherketone/nano-hydroxyapatite/carbon fiber ternary biocomposite. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 2015;136:64-73.  Back to cited text no. 3
Wang X, Lu T, Wen J, Xu L, Zeng D, Wu Q, et al. Selective responses of human gingival fibroblasts and bacteria on carbon fiber reinforced polyetheretherketone with multilevel nanostructured TiO2. Biomaterials 2016;83:207-18.  Back to cited text no. 4
Schwitalla AD, Spintig T, Kallage I, Müller WD. Pressure behavior of different PEEK materials for dental implants. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2016;54:295-304.  Back to cited text no. 5


Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

  In this article

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded293    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal