Review Article
“A Brief Chronological Review of Dental Implant History”
Rajan Rajput1,*, Zakariya Chouhan2, Monica Sindhu3, Sowmya Sundararajan4, Ravi Raj Singh Chouhan5
1Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Oral Medicine & Radiology, 2,3,4,5 BDS, (MPH), PG Student, Dept. of Public Health, Manipal
University, Manipal, Karnataka
*Corresponding Author:
Email: rajan099@gmail.com
Abstract
From ancient era to contemporary modern time’s replacements of missing teeth with artificial teeth has been an aspiration of
humankind. The history of implants goes back to Egyptian civilization where first copper stud was used in the mouth. Human skulls
dating from 600 A.D showed man attempted to implant carved shells into the anterior mandible. In the beginning of the 1800s, in
Europe the teeth were bought off from the resurrectionists which were collected from the poor or the corpses for purposes of
allotransplantation which was later discarded due to secondary infections. In 1900s a revolution was seen in dental implants and
various materials were used such as porcelain, cobalt-chromium –molybdenum, titanium etc. Prof Branemark in 1960s with the
discovery his concept of osseo integration brought the defining moment in history dental implants. This article provides a brief
chorological overview of history of dental implants.
Keyword: History, Dental Implants, Chronological order.
Introduction was a French dentist, Maggiolo J, he describes a method
Dental implants history goes back to centuries ago to implant 18-karat gold alloy, with three branches into
and people have attempted to replace the missing teeth the jawbone, and to install a porcelain crown as a
with different ways to regain full, comfortable superstructure in his book: “Le Manuel de l’Art du
masticatory function and facial esthetics. Prior to the era Dentiste” (1809)3. In 1905Scholl made a root-form,
of osseointegrationthere were various designs of dental porcelain implant which consisted of corrugated
implants and frameworks used to support dentures and structure. He also proposed a design in which a wire was
partial dentures with different success rates. The various initially incorporate within the superstructure for
materials used in implants are porcelain, cobalt- forming a connection with the remainder of the original
chromium, iridioplatinum but the discovery of titanium tooth
changed the course of implant history. 1900-1950: New revolution was seen in materials in
Branemark has coined the term osseous integration 1937, when cobalt-chromium-molybdenum alloy was
and worked on circulation of bone marrow healing which developed and used on patients by Stock at Harvard
greatly influenced the implant concepts1. After this there University3 and showed great results in patients after
was materials like titanium and numerous materials were years of follow-up. In 1940, Dahl was the first person to
used which were biocompatible with human body. In attempt subperiosteal implant, but this approach did not
recent decades predictable dental implants were become common before being employed by Gershkoff
introduced and have revolutionized dentistry. Now, after and Goldberg in 1948.
thousands of years of trying, we have dental implants 1950-1980: In the 1950’s, Dr. Bodine observed that
that in some circumstances (e.g., individuals with limited holes for the screws were located in areas where the bone
salivary flow who are especially prone to caries) may be had the greatest strength and thickness and he found
used as an improvement over natural teeth. In present that fewer struts or girders were needed and frame work
scenario different dental implant systems are design were useful4. This decade also included the
commercially available worldwide for the restoration of innovations of Dr. Lee who introduced the use of an
partially or completely edentulous arches. This article endosseous implant with a central post. In 1951, the
provides an overview of contemporary concepts Academy of Implant Dentures was established, which is
regarding the maintenance of modern dental implants presently known as the American Academy of Implant
Dentistry5
Chronological Review In 1956, Dr. Yamane established an independent
Ancient Era: The history of the dental implant goes institute to experiment on animals, which produced
back to 3000 B.C., to the period when the Ancient many experts in the field of artificial roots. The institute
Egyptian civilization prospered. is currently known as the Japan Institute for Advanced
1600-1800: In 1687 according to Times of Allen’s2 Dentistry6. Implant designs saw a breakthrough in1960’s
report in 1800s period there was mention of dental with the basic spiral design was modified by Dr.
replantation and transpalantion and it was where surgery Leonard Linkow in 1963.7 The blade implant were
was started in this era. The first person to publish a introduced by Linkow, making it possible to place it in
description of the technique of modern dental implants
International Dental Journal of Students Research; October 2016;4(3):105-107 105
Rajan Rajput et al. “A Brief Chronological Review of Dental Implant History”
either the maxilla or the mandible and is now recognized 1981. He followed his original group of dental implant
as an endosseous implant. patients for 20 years. The Toronto Conference on
The concept of Osseo integration which was given Osseointegration in Clinical Dentistry created the first
by by brånemark in Europe 1950 said that titanum can guidelines for what would be considered successful
be integrated with bone revolutionized the dental implant implant dentistry was held in 1982. Dr. David Scharf in
history.8 The Branemark technique utilized 1988 places his first dental implant. General dentist are
biocompatible titanium-alloy implants that were being flooded with weekend courses enticing them to
atraumatically inserted into the alveolar process. This start placing dental implants and learn as they go on their
has come to be known as Branemark’s theory and the patients. Dr. Scharf has been involved with modern day
concept of osseointegration flourished rapidly in the dental implants almost since their inception giving him a
1980s, which brought about a defining moment in the level of expertise few dentists achieve.
clinical field of implants. Dr. David Scharf publishes data in 1993 in the
The first screw-type implant called Ventplant, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants showing that
which was completed in 1963 and currently referred to implants can have the same high success rate when
as self-tapping implant, which is covered with screw placed in a dental office setting under aseptic conditions
threads with an open-cage design. Cobalt-chromium as when they are placed in an operating room. This
alloy was used as the metallic material, but is said to have advancement clears the way to for the routine practice of
been replaced by titanium due to the results of placing dental implants in the office rather than a costly
Branemark’sresearch8. Therefore, the Ventplant hospital operating room setting.
disappeared before it saw the light of day. Although this 2000 -2015: An ADA survey in 2002 showed wide
trend was also seen in Japan, Kawahara and Kyocera Co. acceptance of dental implants as the preferred method of
Ltd. succeeded in the formation of monocrystalline tooth replacement.In 2004 Genget al.9 described four
alumina in 1975. Bioceram, which is the product name, common thread configurations: v-thread, thin-thread,
became the first implant made in Japan for both domestic reverse buttress, and square thread. These were very
and overseas use. significant regarding stress distribution and solving
It has been said that the Bioceram was implanted in problems.Mehraliet10 in 2013 gave a significant design
over 60,000 patients and was the most pervasive and ofimplants for porous bone exhibits biological
well-researched implant among the dental implants adaptation and are called functionally graded materials
manufactured in Japan. (FGMs). These are gaining a significant attention in
In 1978, the Harvard Consensus Conference was dental implant applications.
held to establish consensus on the use of implants at In latest trends Fine Element Analysis11 and
Harvard University, and the standard for a successful Computer-aided design and computer-aided
implant was settled on whether the implant remained manufacturing technology12 are used in manufacturing
embedded and functional for five years. This standard of implants. The computerized three dimensional models
may seem extremely short, but it illustrates what the that have been extensively used to predict the
expectations of implant treatments were at the time. characteristics of stress distribution in bone surrounding
In the 1980s, Professor Zarb of the University of implants. The implant designs are influenced by both the
Toronto played a central role in holding the Toronto implant dimensions and the biomechanical bond formed
Conference on Osseointegrationin Clinical Dentistry, between the bone and the implant.
where Branemark presented the results of his research In the recent clinical studies Blaschkeet al13 reported
over 30 years and his clinical practice for nearly 20 that dental implants made from zirconia are a feasible
years. With this Conference as a turning point, the alternative to titanium dental implants. In addition to
Branemark Regimen spread over North America. The excellent cosmetic results, zirconia implants allow a
typical Branemark regimen during this period consisted degree of osseointegration and soft tissue response that
of implanting four to six fixtures into the mental foramen is superior to that of titanium dental implants.
of the lower jaw, with the subsequent placement of
bilateral cantilever as the standard prosthesis and Conclusion
advocated surgical two-stage technique which became The dental implants history is a magnificent and
widespread throughout the world and many clones of fascinating journey through time. One can only stop and
this design were produced and are still in use today. marvel at man’s ingenuity over the developments and
1980-2000: Towards the late 1980s, the revolutionary techniques of implants with time. As time moves on the
movement of the Branemark regimen swept over Japan patients gets the very best in tooth replacement choices
in the same way, and a surge in implant research took for their present and future needs.
place. This movement was a different kind seen with
Linkow’s Blade-type or the Bioceram that had its References
struggles, and has continued its uses to this day. 1. Branemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, et al.
Professor Branemark published a paper covering all Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the
the data he had amassed regarding titanium implants in
International Dental Journal of Students Research; October 2016;4(3):105-107 106
Rajan Rajput et al. “A Brief Chronological Review of Dental Implant History”
edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand
J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl. 1977;16:1–132.
2. Allen C. Curious observations on the teeth. London. John
Bale, Sons & Danielsson, LTD 1687:12,13.
3. Ring M E. Pause for a moment in dental history: A
thousand years of dental implants: A definitive history -
Part 1. Compendium 1995;16:1060-1069.
4. Bodine RL. Experimental subperiosteal dental implants.
U.S. Armed Forces Med J 1953;4:441-51.
5. Sullivan R M. Implant dentistry and the concept of
osseointregration: A historical perspective. J of CA Dental
Assoc 2001;29(11):737-745.
6. http://www.koukai-kouza.com/aboutme/index.html
7. Kawahara H. From organization of the academy until
today, Journal of the Japanese Society for Dental
Implants.1978;1(1):3-10.
8. Branemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, et al.
Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the
edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand
J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl. 1977;16:1–132.
9. Geng JP, Ma QS, Xu W, Tan KB, Liu GR. Finite element
analysis of four thread-form configurations in a stepped
screw implant. J Oral Rehabil 2004;31:233-9.
10. Mehrali M, Shirazi FS, Mehrali M, Metselaar HS, Kadri
NA, Osman NA. Dental implants from functionally graded
materials. J Biomed Mater Res A 2013;101:3046-57.
11. Triplett RG, Frohberg U, Sykaras N, Woody RD. Implant
materials, design, and surface topographies: their influence
on osseointegration of dental implants. J Long Term Eff
Med Implants 2003;13:485-501.
12. Mandhane SS, More AP. A review: evaluation of design
parameters of dental implant abutment. Inter J Emerging
Sci Eng 2014;2:64-7.
13. Blaschke C, Volz U. Soft and hard tissue response to
zirconium dioxide dental implants. a clinical study in man.
Neuroendocrinol Lett. 2006;27 (suppl 1):69–72.
International Dental Journal of Students Research; October 2016;4(3):105-107 107
Copyright of International Dental Journal of Students' Research is the property of
International Dental Journal of Students' Research and its content may not be copied or
emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
