Literature DB >> 22103684

Direct current electric stimulation in implant osseointegration: an experimental animal study with sheep.

Guhan Dergin1, Mustafa Akta, Bahar Gürsoy, Yalçin Devecioglu, Mehmet Kürkçü, Emre Benlidayi.   

Abstract

In an effort to obtain a high-quality bone-implant interface, several methods involving alteration of surface morphological, physicochemical, and biochemical properties are being investigated. The aim of our study was to increase the osseointegration rate and quality and decrease the waiting period of dental implants before loading by using a microelectric implant stimulator device. It imitates microelectrical signals, which occur in bone fractures described in terms of piezoelectric theory. A single dental implant (Zimmer Dental), 3.7 mm in diameter, was inserted into the tibia of sheep bilaterally. Twenty-four dental implants were inserted into 12 sheep. Implant on the tibia of each sheep was stimulated with 7.5 μA direct current (DC), while the other side did not receive any stimulation and served as a control. Animals were sacrificed 1, 2, and 3 months after implantation. Bone segments with implants were processed with unclassified method. The determination of new bone formation and osseointegration around the dental implants was investigated by means of undecalcified method, histomorphologically. No statistically significant difference in bone-to-implant contact (BIC) ratio, osteoblastic activity, and new bone formation was found between the stimulation group and the control group at the late phase of healing (4, 8, and 12 weeks). No evidence was found that electric stimulation with implanted 7.5 μA DC is effective at late phase implant osseointegration on a sheep experimental model.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22103684     DOI: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-10-00172

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Oral Implantol        ISSN: 0160-6972            Impact factor:   1.779


  5 in total

Review 1.  Electrical stimulation-based bone fracture treatment, if it works so well why do not more surgeons use it?

Authors:  Mit Balvantray Bhavsar; Zhihua Han; Thomas DeCoster; Liudmila Leppik; Karla Mychellyne Costa Oliveira; John H Barker
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2019-04-06       Impact factor: 3.693

2.  Nerve electrical stimulation enhances osseointegration of implants in the beagle.

Authors:  Ping Zhou; Fei He; Bin Liu; Shicheng Wei
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-03-20       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Enhancing osteoblast survival through pulsed electrical stimulation and implications for osseointegration.

Authors:  Emily Pettersen; Furqan A Shah; Max Ortiz-Catalan
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-11-17       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 4.  Electrical stimulation to promote osseointegration of bone anchoring implants: a topical review.

Authors:  Emily Pettersen; Jenna Anderson; Max Ortiz-Catalan
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 4.262

5.  Continuous Electrical Stimulation Affects Initial Growth and Proliferation of Adipose-Derived Stem Cells.

Authors:  Peer W Kämmerer; Vivien Engel; Franz Plocksties; Anika Jonitz-Heincke; Dirk Timmermann; Nadja Engel; Bernhard Frerich; Rainer Bader; Daniel G E Thiem; Anna Skorska; Robert David; Bilal Al-Nawas; Michael Dau
Journal:  Biomedicines       Date:  2020-11-08
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.