Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) in Dental Implantology: A Systematic Review
Journal of Dental School,
Vol. 43 No. 4 (2025),
18 October 2025
,
Page 216-224
https://doi.org/10.22037/jds.v43i4.47162
Abstract
Objective(s): Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is a thermoplastic, semi-crystalline, aromatic polymer known for its excellent physical, mechanical, and electrical properties. This review has explored PEEK's properties and its diverse applications in the field of implantology. Methods: This systematic review was conducted based on the PRISMA guideline. All articles up to 2025 were searched in the PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Springer Link, Science Direct, and Wiley databases using the relevant keywords. Among 170 relevant articles, the abstracts of 49 articles with the highest relevance to the topic were studied, and 25 articles with the highest relevance were selected and reviewed. Results: This study categorized the diverse applications of PEEK in implantology as follows: Implant fixtures, Temporary abutments, Permanent abutments, Scan bodies, Temporary implant prostheses, and Healing abutments. While numerous studies suggest that PEEK represents the future of dental materials science, further clinical research is warranted. Conclusion: The use of PEEK fixtures can prevent stress shielding due to its closer elastic modulus to the surrounding bone. However, the use of PEEK as an implant fixture faces challenges due to low osseointegration, and the use of surface coating is recommended. The probability of gaps in the abutment and implant margin in PEEK is higher than in titanium. Screw loosening in PEEK abutments is twice that of titanium types. But PEEK can be a good alternative for temporary abutments. Plaque accumulation to coarse PEEK particles is higher and is not recommended as a healing abutment. Due to the lack of light reflection, some believe that the PEEK scan body is more accurate than titanium types; however, studies have shown the opposite. Because PEEK is more flexible than titanium and moves during torque, it reduces the accuracy of the final scan.
- Prostheses and Implants
- Dental Implants
- Dental Materials
How to Cite
References
Ortega-Martínez J, Farré-Lladós M, Cano-Batalla J, Cabratosa-Termes J. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) as a medical and dental material. A literature review. Medical Research Archives. 2017;5(4). doi: 10.18103/mra.v5i4.1209
Maldonado-Naranjo AL, Healy AT, Kalfas IH. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) intervertebral cage as a cause of chronic systemic allergy: a case report. Spine J. 2015;15(7):e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.04.011
Ma R, Tang T. Current strategies to improve the bioactivity of PEEK. Int J Mol Sci. 2014;15(4):5426-45. doi: 10.3390/ijms15045426
Kurtz SM, Devine JN. PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials. 2007;28(32):4845-69. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.07.013
Jackson Irudhayam S, Hariram V. A Brief Review on PEEK as biomaterial, Importance of Implant Design, 3D Printing and FEA in Dental Implant. E3S Web Conf. 2024; 491(01017):9. doi: 10.1051/e3sconf/202449101017
Schwitalla A, Abou-Emara M, Spintig T, Lackmann J, Müller W. Finite element analysis of the biomechanical effects of PEEK dental implants on the peri-implant bone. J Biomech. 2015;48(1):1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2014.11.017
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. doi: 10.1016/j.jpor.2015.10.001
Akay C, Ersöz MB. PEEK in dentistry, properties and application areas. Int Dent Res. 2020;10(2):60-5. doi:10.5577/intdentres.2020.vol10.no2.6
Alotaibi N, Naudi K, Conway D, Ayoub A. The current state of peek implant osseointergration and future perspectives: A systematic review. Eur Cell Mater. 2020;40:1-20. doi:10.22203/ecm.v040a01
Bathala L, Majeti V, Rachuri N, Singh N, Gedela S. The role of polyether ether ketone (PEEK) in dentistry–a review. J Med Life. 2019;12(1):5. doi:10.25122/jml-2019-0003
Koch F, Weng D, Krämer S, Biesterfeld S, Jahn‐Eimermacher A, Wagner W. Osseointegration of one‐piece zirconia implants compared with a titanium implant of identical design: a histomorphometric study in the dog. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010;21(3):350-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01832.x
Webster TJ, Patel AA, Rahaman M, Bal BS. Anti-infective and osteointegration properties of silicon nitride, poly (ether ether ketone), and titanium implants. Acta biomater. 2012;8(12):4447-54. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2012.07.038
Schwitalla AD, Zimmermann T, Spintig T, Kallage I, Müller W-D. Fatigue limits of different PEEK materials for dental implants. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2017;69:163-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2016.12.019
Ortega-Martínez J, Delgado LM, Ortiz-Hernández M, Punset M, Cano-Batalla J, Cayon MR, et al. In vitro assessment of PEEK and titanium implant abutments: Screw loosening and microleakage evaluations under dynamic mechanical testing. J Prosthet Dent. 2022;127(3):470-6. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.09.033
Matos JDMd, Lopes GdRS, Queiroz DA, Pereira ALJ, Sinhoreti MAC, Ramos NdC, et al. Influence of the peek abutments on mechanical behavior of the internal connections single implant. Materials (Basel). 2022;15(22):8133. 10.3390/ma15228133
Blanch-Martínez N, Arias-Herrera S, Martínez-González A. Behavior of polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) in prostheses on dental implants. A review. J Clin Exp Dent. 2021;13(5):e520-26. doi: 10.4317/jced.58102
Peng T-Y, Shih Y-H, Hsia S-M, Wang T-H, Li P-J, Lin D-J, et al. In vitro assessment of the cell metabolic activity, cytotoxicity, cell attachment, and inflammatory reaction of human oral fibroblasts on polyetheretherketone (PEEK) implant–abutment. Polymers (Basel). 2021;13(17):2995.
doi: 10.3390/polym13172995
Stawarczyk B, Beuer F, Wimmer T, Jahn D, Sener B, Roos M, et al. Polyetheretherketone—a suitable material for fixed dental prostheses? J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2013;101(7):1209-16. doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.32932
Steiner M, Mitsias ME, Ludwig K, Kern M. In vitro evaluation of a mechanical testing chewing simulator.
Dent Mater. 2009;25(4):494-9. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2008.09.010
Rea M, Ricci S, Ghensi P, Lang NP, Botticelli D, Soldini C. Marginal healing using Polyetheretherketone as healing abutments: an experimental study in dogs.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017;28(7):e46-50. doi: 10.1111/clr.12854
Hung CCU, Costa RC, Pereira G, Abdo VL, do Santos Noronha M, Retamal-Valdes B, et al. Oral microbial colonization on titanium and polyetheretherketone dental implant healing abutments: An in vitro and in vivo study. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;133(6):1545-52. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.08.010
Zalkind M, Ever‐Hadani P, Hochman N. Resin‐bonded fixed partial denture retention: a retrospective 13‐year follow‐up. J Oral Rehabil. 2003;30(10):971-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2003.01165.x
Zoidis P, Papathanasiou I. Modified PEEK resin-bonded fixed dental prosthesis as an interim restoration after implant placement. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(5):637-41.
doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.04.024
Agustín-Panadero R, Serra-Pastor B, Roig-Vanaclocha A, Román-Rodriguez J-L, Fons-Font A. Mechanical behavior of provisional implant prosthetic abutments. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2015;20(1):e94-102. doi: 10.4317/medoral.19958.
Abhay SS, Ganapathy D, Veeraiyan DN, Ariga P, Heboyan A, Amornvit P, et al. Wear resistance, color stability and displacement resistance of milled PEEK crowns compared to zirconia crowns under stimulated chewing and high-performance aging. Polymers (Basel). 2021;13(21):3761. doi: 10.3390/polym13213761
Santing HJ, Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM, Özcan M. Fracture strength and failure mode of maxillary implant‐supported provisional single crowns: A comparison of composite resin crowns fabricated directly over PEEK abutments and solid titanium abutments. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14(6):882-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00322.x
Suphangul S, Rokaya D, Kanchanasobhana C, Rungsiyakull P, Chaijareenont P. PEEK biomaterial in long-term provisional implant restorations: A Review. J Funct Biomater. 2022;13(2):33. doi: 10.3390/jfb13020033
Wiessner A, Wassmann T, Wiessner JM, Schubert A, Wiechens B, Hampe T, et al. In vivo biofilm formation on novel PEEK, titanium, and zirconia implant abutment materials. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(2):1779. doi: 10.3390/ijms24021779
Wang L, He S, Wu X, Liang S, Mu Z, Wei J, et al. Polyetheretherketone/nano-fluorohydroxyapatite composite with antimicrobial activity and osseointegration properties.
Biomaterials. 2014;35(25):6758-75. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.04.085
Zhao Y, Wong HM, Wang W, Li P, Xu Z, Chong EY, et al. Cytocompatibility, osseointegration, and bioactivity of three-dimensional porous and nanostructured network on polyetheretherketone. Biomaterials. 2013;34(37):9264-77.
doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.08.071
Althubaitiy R, Sambrook R, Weisbloom M, Petridis H. The accuracy of digital implant impressions when using and varying the material and diameter of the dental implant scan bodies. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2022;30(4):305-13.
doi: 10.1922/EJPRD_2367Althubaitiy09
Tawfik MHA, El Torky IR, El Sheikh MM. Effect of saliva on accuracy of digital dental implant transfer using two different materials of intraoral scan bodies with different exposed lengths. BMC Oral Health. 2024;24(1):1428. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-05199-1
Lee J-H, Bae J-H, Lee SY. Trueness of digital implant impressions based on implant angulation and scan body materials. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):21892. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-01442-9
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. doi: 10.1016/j.jpor.2015.10.001
Ha S-W, Mayer J, Koch B, Wintermantel E. Plasma-sprayed hydroxylapatite coating on carbon fibre reinforced thermoplastic composite materials. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 1994;5:481-4. doi: 10.1007/BF00058987
Revilla-León M, Barmak AB, Tohme H, Yilmaz B, Kois JC, Gómez-Polo M. Factors that influence the accuracy of maxillomandibular relationship at maximum intercuspation acquired by using intraoral scanners: A systematic review.
J Dent. 2023:138:104718. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104718
Mizumoto RM, Yilmaz B. Intraoral scan bodies in implant dentistry: A systematic review. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 2018;120(3):343-52. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120(3):343-52. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.10.029
Lee J-H. A completely cast-free, digital workflow for fabricating an implant-supported prosthesis with a new coded healing abutment. J Implantol Appl Sci. 2019;23(1):26-35. https://doi.org/10.32542/implantology.2019003
Tan JZH, Tan MY, Toh YLS, Wong KY, Tan KBC. Three-dimensional positional accuracy of intraoral and laboratory implant scan bodies. J Prosthet Dent. 2022;128(4):735-44. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.09.057
Mizumoto RM, Yilmaz B, McGlumphy Jr EA, Seidt J, Johnston WM. Accuracy of different digital scanning techniques and scan bodies
for complete-arch implant-supported prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;123(1):96-104.
doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.01.003
Jahn D. Scan body for determination of positioning and orientation of a dental implant. Google Patents; 2014. https://patents.google.com/patent/US20140377714A1/en
Brånemark PI, Adell R, Breine U, Hansson BO, Lindström J, Ohlsson A. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. Experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1969;3(2):81-100. doi: 10.3109/02844316909036699
Lautenschlager EP, Monaghan P. Titanium and titanium alloys as dental materials. Int Dent J.1993;43(3):245-53.
Prochor P, Frossard L, Sajewicz E. Effect of the material’s stiffness on stress-shielding in osseointegrated implants for bone-anchored prostheses: a numerical analysis and initial benchmark data. Acta Bioeng Biomech. 2020;22(2):69-81.
Fiorellini JP, Sourvanos D, Sarimento H, Karimbux N, Luan KW. Periodontal and implant radiology.
Dent Clin North Am. 2021;65(3):447-73.
doi: 10.1016/j.cden.2021.02.003
Geraets W, Zhang L, Liu Y, Wismeijer D. Annual bone loss and success rates of dental implants based on radiographic measurements. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014;43(7):20140007. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20140007
Ishak MI, Daud R, Noor SNFM, Khor C, Roslan H. Assessment of stress shielding around a dental implant for variation of implant stiffness and parafunctional loading using finite element analysis. Acta Bioeng Biomech. 2022;24(3):147-59.
Eschbach L. Nonresorbable polymers in bone surgery. Injury. 2000;31:D22-D7.
Rahmitasari F, Ishida Y, Kurahashi K, Matsuda T, Watanabe M, Ichikawa T. PEEK with reinforced materials and modifications for dental implant applications. Dent J (Basel). 2017;5(4):35. doi: 10.3390/dj5040035
Goutam M, Giriyapura C, Mishra SK, Gupta S. Titanium allergy: a literature review. Indian J Dermatol. 2014;59(6):630. doi: 10.4103/0019-5154.143526
Mishra S, Chowdhary R. PEEK materials as an alternative to titanium in dental implants: A systematic review. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019;21(1):208-22.
doi: 10.1111/cid.12706.
Williams DF. Biocompatibility pathways and mechanisms for bioactive materials: The bioactivity zone.
Bioact Mater. 2021:10:306-22. doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.08.014
- Abstract Viewed: 144 times
- PDF Downloaded: 461 times