PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether bioactive surfaces were more favorable to bone than bioinert surfaces by evaluating bone responses around two commercial dental implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Bioactive fluoride-modified implants (Osseospeed) were compared with bioinert oxidized implants (TiUnite). Field emission scanning electron microscopy, energy dispersive spectroscopy, and confocal laser scanning microscopy analyzed the implant surface characteristics. Five New Zealand white rabbits were used to evaluate the bone response. Each rabbit received two implants: a fluoride-modified implant in one tibia and an oxidized implant in the other. Drilling was performed bicortically, and a gap defect was created in the upper cortexonly. Bone-to-implant contact and bone area were measured on the histological specimens 2 weeks after implant insertion. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in surface roughness (P > 0.05). The gap defects were almost filled with new bone within a period of 2 weeks. The histomorphometry revealed no significant differences in bone-to-implant contact and bone area (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitation of this study, the bioactive fluoride-modified surface may show no superiority to the bioinert anodized surface in early bone response.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether bioactive surfaces were more favorable to bone than bioinert surfaces by evaluating bone responses around two commercial dental implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Bioactive fluoride-modified implants (Osseospeed) were compared with bioinert oxidized implants (TiUnite). Field emission scanning electron microscopy, energy dispersive spectroscopy, and confocal laser scanning microscopy analyzed the implant surface characteristics. Five New Zealand white rabbits were used to evaluate the bone response. Each rabbit received two implants: a fluoride-modified implant in one tibia and an oxidized implant in the other. Drilling was performed bicortically, and a gap defect was created in the upper cortexonly. Bone-to-implant contact and bone area were measured on the histological specimens 2 weeks after implant insertion. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in surface roughness (P > 0.05). The gap defects were almost filled with new bone within a period of 2 weeks. The histomorphometry revealed no significant differences in bone-to-implant contact and bone area (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitation of this study, the bioactive fluoride-modified surface may show no superiority to the bioinert anodized surface in early bone response.
Authors: Ralf Smeets; Bernd Stadlinger; Frank Schwarz; Benedicta Beck-Broichsitter; Ole Jung; Clarissa Precht; Frank Kloss; Alexander Gröbe; Max Heiland; Tobias Ebker Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2016-07-11 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Nansi López-Valverde; Javier Flores-Fraile; Juan Manuel Ramírez; Bruno Macedo de Sousa; Silvia Herrero-Hernández; Antonio López-Valverde Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2020-06-29 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: José Luis Calvo-Guirado; Marta Satorres; Bruno Negri; Piedad Ramirez-Fernandez; Jose Eduardo Maté-Sánchez de Val; Jose Eduardo Maté-Sánchez; Rafael Delgado-Ruiz; Gerardo Gomez-Moreno; Marcus Abboud; Georgios E Romanos Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2013-10-18 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Seung-Ki Min; Hyun Ki Kang; Da Hyun Jang; Sung Youn Jung; O Bok Kim; Byung-Moo Min; In-Sung Yeo Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2013-03-25 Impact factor: 3.411