V Franke Stenport1, C B Johansson. 1. Department of Biomaterials/Handicap Research, Institute of Surgical Sciences, Göteborg University, Box 412, S-405 30 Göteborg, Sweden. victoria.franke-stenport@hkf.gu.se
Abstract
AIM: The aim of present study was to evaluate if an enamel matrix derivative (Emdogain) may enhance bone formation and osseointegration of titanium implants, using a well-documented rabbit model. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-six threaded commercially pure titanium (cp.ti.) implants were inserted in six New Zealand white rabbits. One implant was placed in each femur and two in each tibia. Prior to implant insertion approximately 0.5 mL of Emdogain (EMD) (test) or the vehicle gel (PGA: propylene glycol alginate) (control) was injected into the surgically prepared implant site. The follow-up time was 6 weeks. Biomechanical evaluations by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and removal torque measurements (RTQ) were performed. Histomorphometrical quantifications were made on ground sections by measurements of the percentage of bone-to-metal contact, bone area inside the threads as well as outside the threads (mirror image). Bone lengths along the implant surface were also measured and used for shear strength calculations. RESULTS: The results demonstrated no beneficial effects from the EMD treatment on bone formation around titanium implants in any of the tested parameters. Significant differences were demonstrated with removal torque test and shear force calculations for the control implants. No other parameter demonstrated a statistically significant difference. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study may indicate that EMD does not contribute to bone formation around titanium implants. This observation may indicate that the bone formation that occurs after EMD treatment in periodontal defects is the result of functional adaptation. However, further research is required to evaluate the effect of EMD treatment on bone formation.
AIM: The aim of present study was to evaluate if an enamel matrix derivative (Emdogain) may enhance bone formation and osseointegration of titanium implants, using a well-documented rabbit model. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-six threaded commercially pure titanium (cp.ti.) implants were inserted in six New Zealand white rabbits. One implant was placed in each femur and two in each tibia. Prior to implant insertion approximately 0.5 mL of Emdogain (EMD) (test) or the vehicle gel (PGA: propylene glycol alginate) (control) was injected into the surgically prepared implant site. The follow-up time was 6 weeks. Biomechanical evaluations by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and removal torque measurements (RTQ) were performed. Histomorphometrical quantifications were made on ground sections by measurements of the percentage of bone-to-metal contact, bone area inside the threads as well as outside the threads (mirror image). Bone lengths along the implant surface were also measured and used for shear strength calculations. RESULTS: The results demonstrated no beneficial effects from the EMD treatment on bone formation around titanium implants in any of the tested parameters. Significant differences were demonstrated with removal torque test and shear force calculations for the control implants. No other parameter demonstrated a statistically significant difference. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study may indicate that EMD does not contribute to bone formation around titanium implants. This observation may indicate that the bone formation that occurs after EMD treatment in periodontal defects is the result of functional adaptation. However, further research is required to evaluate the effect of EMD treatment on bone formation.
Authors: Mark Pitkin; Grigory Raykhtsaum; John Pilling; Oleg V Galibin; Mikhail V Protasov; Julie V Chihovskaya; Irina G Belyaeva; Miralda I Blinova; Natalia M Yudintseva; Igor L Potokin; George P Pinaev; Vladimir Moxson; Volodimir Duz Journal: J Rehabil Res Dev Date: 2007
Authors: S P Lyngstadaas; J C Wohlfahrt; S J Brookes; M L Paine; M L Snead; J E Reseland Journal: Orthod Craniofac Res Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: J Anthony Dacy; Robert Spears; William W Hallmon; David G Kerns; Francisco Rivera-Hidalgo; Zoran S Minevski; Carl J Nelson; Lynne A Opperman Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants Date: 2007 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Frank Schwarz; Daniel Rothamel; Monika Herten; Anton Sculean; Werner Scherbaum; Jürgen Becker Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2004-04-02 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Daniela B Palioto; Thaisângela L Rodrigues; Julie T Marchesan; Márcio M Beloti; Paulo T de Oliveira; Adalberto L Rosa Journal: Head Face Med Date: 2011-07-18 Impact factor: 2.151