Ligature-Induced Peri-Implantitis in Minipigs Revisited

Stübinger, Stefan; Bucher, Ramon; Kronen, Peter W; Schlottig, Falko; Rechenberg, Brigitte von

doi:10.21767/2471-3082.100008

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In systemic disease processes, it seems that the pig model is poorly suited and only used for obesity/metabolic syndrome and/or diabetes [ 269 , 270 , 271 ]. Peri-implantitis also appears to have been poorly investigated [ 272 ]. A range of surgical techniques can be performed, such as (i) site preparation with different osteotomies [ 273 ], (ii) flap procedures [ 274 , 275 ], or (iii) bone surgery with osteodistraction [ 276 ], creation of bone defects [ 277 ], and bone grafting [ 271 , 278 , 279 ].…”

Section: Appendix A1 Research In Non-human Primatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pre-Clinical Models in Implant Dentistry: Past, Present, Future

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biomedical research seeks to generate experimental results for translation to clinical settings. In order to improve the transition from bench to bedside, researchers must draw justifiable conclusions based on data from an appropriate model. Animal testing, as a prerequisite to human clinical exposure, is performed in a range of species, from laboratory mice to larger animals (such as dogs or non-human primates). Minipigs appear to be the animal of choice for studying bone surgery around intraoral dental implants. Dog models, well-known in the field of dental implant research, tend now to be used for studies conducted under compromised oral conditions (biofilm). Regarding small animal models, research studies mostly use rodents, with interest in rabbit models declining. Mouse models remain a reference for genetic studies. On the other hand, over the last decade, scientific advances and government guidelines have led to the replacement, reduction, and refinement of the use of all animal models in dental implant research. In new development strategies, some in vivo experiments are being progressively replaced by in vitro or biomaterial approaches. In this review, we summarize the key information on the animal models currently available for dental implant research and highlight (i) the pros and cons of each type, (ii) new levels of decisional procedures regarding study objectives, and (iii) the outlook for animal research, discussing possible non-animal options.

show abstract

Section: Appendix A1 Research In Non-human Primatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Appendix A1 Research In Non-human Primatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pre-Clinical Models in Implant Dentistry: Past, Present, Future

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Peri-implant bone regeneration in pigs

Shanbhag,

Sanz-Esporrin,

Kampleitner

et al. 2024

Int J Implant Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To review the current literature to answer the focused question: in the experimental pig model (population), which types of peri-implant bone defects (exposure) have been used evaluate different modes of therapy and what is their capacity for spontaneous healing and regeneration (outcome)? Methods Following PRISMA guidelines, electronic databases were searched for studies reporting peri-implant bone defects in the maxillae or mandibles of pigs. Those studies which reported a control group of untreated defects with assessment of spontaneous regeneration [new bone area (BA)] and/or re-osseointegration [new bone-to-implant contact (BIC)] via quantitative radiography or histomorphometry were included in a random effects meta-analysis for the outcomes BA and BIC. Results Overall, 21 studies, mostly performed in the mandibles of minipigs, were included. Most studies reported ‘acute’ intrabony (circumferential and/or dehiscence; n = 12) or supra-alveolar defects (horizontal; n = 4). Five studies attempted to induce ‘chronic’ peri-implantitis lesions using ligatures with conflicting results. Meta-analyses revealed pooled estimates (with 95% confidence intervals) of 48.07% BIC (30.14–66%) and 64.31% BA (42.71–85.91%) in intrabony defects, and 52.09% BIC (41.83–62.35%) and 28.62% BA (12.97–44.28%) in supra-alveolar defects. Heterogeneity in the meta-analysis was high (I2 > 90%). Conclusion Current evidence for peri-implant bone regeneration in pigs is mainly based on acute intrabony defects, which demonstrate a high capacity for spontaneous regeneration and re-osseointegration. The evidence for chronic peri-implantitis is limited and does not clearly indicate a spontaneous progression of the disease in this animal model.

show abstract

Ligature-Induced Peri-Implantitis in Minipigs Revisited

Cited by 2 publications

References 16 publications

Pre-Clinical Models in Implant Dentistry: Past, Present, Future

Pre-Clinical Models in Implant Dentistry: Past, Present, Future

Peri-implant bone regeneration in pigs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About