Commercially pure titanium (cp-Ti) versus titanium alloy (Ti6Al4V) materials as bone anchored implants — Is one truly better than the other?

Commercially pure titanium (cp-Ti) and titanium alloys (typically Ti6Al4V) display excellent corrosion resistance and biocompatibility. Although the chemical composition and topography are considered important, the mechanical properties of the material and the loading conditions in the host have, conventionally, influenced material selection for different clinical applications: predominantly Ti6Al4V in orthopaedics while cp-Ti in dentistry. This paper attempts to address three important questions: (i) To what extent do the surface properties differ when cp-Ti and Ti6Al4V materials are manufactured with the same processing technique?, (ii) Does bone tissue respond differently to the two materials, and (iii) Do bacteria responsible for causing biomaterial-associated infections respond differently to the two materials? It is concluded that: (i) Machined cp-Ti and Ti6Al4V exhibit similar surface morphology, topography, phase composition and chemistry, (ii) Under experimental conditions, cp-Ti and Ti6Al4V demonstrate similar osseointegration and biomechanical anchorage, and (iii) Experiments in vitro fail to disclose differences between cp-Ti and Ti6Al4V to harbour Staphylococcus epidermidis growth. No clinical comparative studies exist which could determine if long-term, clinical differences exist between the two types of bulk materials. It is debatable whether cp-Ti or Ti6Al4V exhibit superiority over the other, and further comparative studies, particularly in a clinical setting, are required.