Comparative study on the osseointegration of implants in dog mandibles according to the implant surface treatment

Yoon, Wook-Jae; Kim, Su-Gwan; Oh, Ji‐Su; You, Jun; Jeong, Kyung-In; Lim, Sung Chul; Jeong, Mi‐Ae

doi:10.5125/jkaoms.2016.42.6.345

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Different manufacturers develop other types of surfaces. In the case of BioHorizons, the RBT ® surface is based on sandblasting with synthetic resorbable bioceramic particles, such as titanium dioxide, hydroxyapatite, or tricalcium phosphate particles, to make the surface rougher [24,25]. The presence of these particles, which some of them are naturally part of the mineral bone phase, seeks to improve and accelerate the osseointegration phase [10].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Three Dental Implant Surfaces on Cell Viability and Bone Behavior. An In Vitro and a Histometric Study in a Rabbit Model

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The chemical composition and the surface characteristics of dental implants are factors that have a decisive effect on the osseointegration process. The surface characterization at the compositional and topographic level of three dental implants available in the market was performed with different surface treatments: (1) sandblasted and acid etched surface (SLA), (2) hydroxyapatite (HA) and tricalcium phosphate (TCP) blasted surface (HA/TCP), and (3) HA-blasted and non-etching acid washed surface (HA + AW). In addition, an in vitro viability study of MG-63 osteoblast cells was performed with a JC-1 test. To complete the study, an in vivo study was conducted in New Zealand rabbits. The study analyzed the histometric characteristics of the bone formed around the implants at the level of area, volume, bone density, accumulated bone density, and bone–implant contact (BIC). The rabbits were sacrificed at 6 weeks after implants were placed in the tibial metaphysis. No statistically significant differences were observed at the level of cell viability or histometric parameters between the different study groups (p > 0.05). SLA and HA/TCP surfaces were the ones that obtained a higher BIC value. Taking into account the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that the different implant surfaces analyzed favor a good bone response.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Three Dental Implant Surfaces on Cell Viability and Bone Behavior. An In Vitro and a Histometric Study in a Rabbit Model

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To increase osseointegration during implant placement, research has concentrated on the surface modification of implants, and morphological analyses have looked at the thread pattern in close interaction with the bone's surface [ 13 ]. The morphological alongside chemical characteristics of the implant, such as the charge of the surface, protein absorption, wettability, cell and tissue growth on the surface, and cell-surface interactions according to Ratner and Porter [ 14 ], are significant factors that influence how the surface interacts with the bioactive materials. According to Davies' research [ 15 ], platelet activation at the outermost layer of the implant leads to an interaction between osteocytes and the implant interface that promotes the production of new bone and increases bone conduction continuity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Analysis of Surface Modification Techniques for Assessing Oral Implant Osseointegration: An Animal Study

K S,

Sreevidya,

T K

et al. 2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Effective implant placement depends critically on the implant's level of osseointegration with the alveolar bone. To increase osseointegration during implant placement, research has concentrated on the surface modification of implants, and morphological analyses have looked at the thread pattern in close interaction with the bone's surface. Aim: This study aimed to assess and compare the extent of oral implant osseointegration in different surface modification techniques. Materials and methods: In this study, 12 healthy adult dogs aged 18-24 months were used. Tooth extractions were performed on both sides of the mandible, and wounds were closed with sutures. Two months later, the right mandible of each dog underwent local anesthesia and general anesthesia. Four different implant types were placed based on their surface treatments: resorbable blast media (RBM)-treated implants, hydroxyapatite (HA) implants with an ultra-thin HA film, hydrothermal-treated HA implants coated with HA, and sandblasting combined acid etching (SLA) implants treated with plasma spray and acid etching. A total of 48 implants were divided into two- and four-week groups, with identical dimensions. Each dog received two implants from each group, for a total of eight implants per dog. The implants were securely placed into the superior alveolar bone with a torque greater than 35-N up to a depth of 1 mm. Periotest M (Medizintechnik Gulden e.K., Modautal, Germany) was used to calculate the periotest value (PTV) as a typical value on the buccal side of each implant immediately following placement and sacrifice to test the main fixation and stability of the implants. Resonance frequency analysis (RFA) was utilised by Osstell Mentor (Osstell AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) to simultaneously assess the implant stability quotient (ISQ) on the medial, distal, buccal, and lingual sides of the implant. The rotational torque in one of the sacrificed dogs was calculated using the MGT 50 (ELECTROMATIC Equipment Co., Inc., New York, USA) torque analyzer. The histomorphometric evaluation was performed using an optical microscope (Olympus Corporation, Tokyo, Japan). The upper half's bone-implant contact (BIC), which was found to be more important for implant stability, was studied together with the ratio of the new bone formation area (NBFA) to the complete implant. Results: The maximum stability was observed in HA-treated implants in the fourth week. The minimum stability was observed in hydrothermal-treated HA implants in the fourth week. The stability in each group was greater in the four-week evaluation as compared to the two-week evaluation. The stability was satisfactory in almost all implants at two- and three-week evaluations. The maximum value of the percentage area of newly formed bone at the two- and four-week evaluations was observed in HA-treated implants. The minimum value of the percentage of the area of newly formed bone at two- and four-week evaluations was observed in SLA and RBM-treated implants r...

show abstract

“…A recent study revealed that UV irradiation of Korean implants prior to implantation in dogs did not improve the mean insertion torque or the BIC values in all studied groups at 4 and 12 weeks post implantation [ 7 ]. Alternatively, resorbable blast media (RBM) and sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) surface implants were found to be safely preferable with proper case selection [ 8 ]. Furthermore, UMUT-SLA and tricalcium phosphate/hydroxyapatite (TCP/HA) surfaces improved the BIC value, and induced accumulated bone density during the osseointegration period (six weeks) [ 9 , 10 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Histologic and Histomorphometric Evaluation of a New Bioactive Liquid BBL on Implant Surface: A Preclinical Study in Foxhound Dogs

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Bioactive chemical surface modifications improve the wettability and osseointegration properties of titanium implants in both animals and humans. The objective of this animal study was to investigate and compare the bioreactivity characteristics of titanium implants (BLT) pre-treated with a novel bone bioactive liquid (BBL) and the commercially available BLT-SLA active. Methods: Forty BLT-SLA titanium implants were placed in in four foxhound dogs. Animals were divided into two groups (n = 20): test (BLT-SLA pre-treated with BBL) and control (BLT-SLA active) implants. The implants were inserted in the post extraction sockets. After 8 and 12 weeks, the animals were sacrificed, and mandibles were extracted, containing the implants and the surrounding soft and hard tissues. Bone-to-implant contact (BIC), inter-thread bone area percentage (ITBA), soft tissue, and crestal bone loss were evaluated by histology and histomorphometry. Results: All animals were healthy with no implant loss or inflammation symptoms. All implants were clinically and histologically osseo-integrated. Relative to control groups, test implants demonstrated a significant 1.5- and 1.7-fold increase in BIC and ITBA values, respectively, at both assessment intervals. Crestal bone loss was also significantly reduced in the test group, as compared with controls, at week 8 in both the buccal crests (0.47 ± 0.32 vs 0.98 ± 0.51 mm, p < 0.05) and lingual crests (0.39* ± 0.3 vs. 0.89 ± 0.41 mm, p < 0.05). At week 12, a pronounced crestal bone loss improvement was observed in the test group (buccal, 0.41 ± 0.29 mm and lingual, 0.54 ± 0.23 mm). Tissue thickness showed comparable values at both the buccal and lingual regions and was significantly improved in the studied groups (0.82–0.92 mm vs. 33–48 mm in the control group). Conclusions: Relative to the commercially available BLT-SLA active implants, BLT-SLA pre-treated with BBL showed improved histological and histomorphometric characteristics indicating a reduced titanium surface roughness and improved wettability, promoting healing and soft and hard tissue regeneration at the implant site.

show abstract

Comparative study on the osseointegration of implants in dog mandibles according to the implant surface treatment

Cited by 10 publications

References 27 publications

Influence of Three Dental Implant Surfaces on Cell Viability and Bone Behavior. An In Vitro and a Histometric Study in a Rabbit Model

Influence of Three Dental Implant Surfaces on Cell Viability and Bone Behavior. An In Vitro and a Histometric Study in a Rabbit Model

Comparative Analysis of Surface Modification Techniques for Assessing Oral Implant Osseointegration: An Animal Study

Histologic and Histomorphometric Evaluation of a New Bioactive Liquid BBL on Implant Surface: A Preclinical Study in Foxhound Dogs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About