Histomorphometric analysis of implant osseointegration using hydrophilic implants in diabetic rats

Schuster, Alessandra Julie; Abreu, João Luiz Bittencourt de; Pola, Natália Marcumini; Witek, Lukasz; Coelho, Paulo G.; Faot, Fernanda

doi:10.1007/s00784-021-03892-x

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This property increases the proliferation of undifferentiated mesenchymal cells 12 and their differentiation into osteoblasts 18 , which stimulates the expression of osteogenic factors on this surface 11 , 13 . These aforementioned properties demonstrated a positive impact on osseointegration in clinical studies 9 , and in preclinical studies that evaluated challenging conditions for the osseointegration process, such as in grafted areas 10 , and in animals with hyperglycaemia 19 and osteoporosis 11 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of hydrophilic surface osseointegration in low-density bone: Preclinical study in rabbits

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate the osseointegration of a hydrophilic surface (blasting + acid etching + immersion in isotonic solution) in comparison with that of a control surface (blasting + acid etching) using an experimental model of low-density bone. To perform the study, 24 rabbits were submitted to the installation of 4 implants in the iliac bone bilaterally: 2 implants with a control surface and 2 implants with a hydrophilic surface. The rabbits were euthanized at 2, 4, and 8 weeks after implant installation. After euthanasia, one implant from each surface was used to perform the removal torque analysis, and the other implant was used for the execution of non-decalcified histological sections and evaluation of the bone implant contact (% BIC) as well as the fraction of bone tissue area between the implant threads (% BBT). The implants with a hydrophilic surface presented higher %BIC (42.92 ± 2.85% vs. 29.49 ± 10.27%) and % BBT (34.32 ± 8.52% vs. 23.20 ± 6.75%) (p < 0.05) in the 2-week period. Furthermore, the hydrophilic surface presented higher removal torque in the 8-week period (76.13 ± 16.00 Ncm2 vs. 52.77 ± 13.49 Ncm2) (p<0.05). Implants with a hydrophilic surface exhibited acceleration in the process of osseointegration, culminating in greater secondary stability in low-density bone than in implants with a control surface.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of hydrophilic surface osseointegration in low-density bone: Preclinical study in rabbits

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One controllable factor linked to success in osseointegration is the achievement of good primary stability, which makes secondary stability a more predictable event (2,3). Structural modifications in dental implants have been proposed to optimize the osseointegration process, and these modifications can be performed in the macrostructure or microstructure of the implants (3)(4)(5)(6)(7). Changes in the macrostructure more directly affect primary stability and the decision to establish immediate load application (3,6,8), while microstructural modifications are related to the acceleration of the conversion from primary to secondary stability due to biological stimuli in the osseointegration process (5,(9)(10)(11).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of different thread configurations on hydrophilic implant stability. A split-mouth RCT

Barbosa,

Oliveira,

Goulart

et al. 2024

Braz. Dent. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This split-mouth randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the primary and secondary stability of hybrid implants with different thread configurations and hydrophilic surfaces. Twenty patients with a partially edentulous maxilla were selected. These patients received two types of implants with the same hydrophilic surface: CTP group: Cylindrical-Tapered implant with perforating threads; CTH: Cylindrical-Tapered implant with hybrid threads configuration (perforating and condensing threads). The primary and secondary stability parameters were measured by insertion torque and resonance frequency analysis at the time of implant placement and 7, 28, 56, and 90 days after the surgical procedure. The paired t-test was used to compare the data on the implant's stability between the groups. The statistical analysis was performed with a confidence level set at 95%. It was found that the implants in the CTH group presented higher primary stability values at the time of implant placement, due to the higher ISQ (63.61 ± 9.44 vs. 40.59 ±7.46) and insertion torque (36.92 ± 16.50 Ncm vs. 28.00 ± 14.40 Ncm), than the implants in the CTP group. The CTH group presented higher ISQ values in all follow-up periods: 7 days (68.67 ± 7.60 vs. 41.55 ± 9.07), 28 days (68.61 ± 5.98 vs. 47.90 ±13.10), 56 days (74.09 ± 3.96 vs. 55.85 ± 13.18), and 90 days (75.45 ± 4.02 vs. 63.47 ± 6.92) after implant placement. Hybrid implants with perforating and condensing threads demonstrated greater stability than hybrid implants with only perforating threads.

show abstract

Histomorphometric analysis of implant osseointegration using hydrophilic implants in diabetic rats

Cited by 2 publications

References 39 publications

Evaluation of hydrophilic surface osseointegration in low-density bone: Preclinical study in rabbits

Evaluation of hydrophilic surface osseointegration in low-density bone: Preclinical study in rabbits

Effect of different thread configurations on hydrophilic implant stability. A split-mouth RCT

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About