Literature DB >> 22487460

An experimental comparison of two different clinically used implant designs and surfaces.

Jan Gottlow1, Sargon Barkarmo, Lars Sennerby.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Various designs of dental implants representing different geometries and surface technologies are commercially available and clinically used in patients. However, data with regard to bone tissue responses and stability for comparison of their biologic performances are rare.
PURPOSE: The aim of the present experimental investigation was to compare the bone tissue responses and implant stability between two commonly used dental implants representing different geometries and surface characteristics.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 90 dental implants (4.3 mm in diameter, 10 mm long) with an oxidized surface (Replace Select Tapered, TiUnite, Nobel Biocare AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) (OX) and 90 implants (4.1 mm in diameter, 10 mm total length) with a hydrophilic sand-blasted and acid etched surface (Standard Plus, SLActive, Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) (HSBA) were placed in the distal femur (n = 1) and tibia (n = 2) of 30 rabbits. The implants were analyzed with implant stability quotient (ISQ) measurements, removal torque (RTQ) and histomorphometry (bone-implant contact, BIC) after 10 days, 3, and 6 weeks. Moreover, RTQ values were corrected for differences in surface area by calculating the shear strength for each implant.
RESULTS: RTQ and ISQ measurements showed an increase with time for both implant types. A significantly higher RTQ value was observed for the HSBA implant at 3 weeks (p = .05). A lower ISQ value was seen for HSBA than for OX implants at placement in the tibia (p < 0.001). HSBA implants showed higher shear strength values than OX implants after 3 weeks (p < .001), and 6 weeks (p < .01). The morphometric measurements showed significantly higher BIC for HSBA implants after 10 days (p < .01), similar values after 3 weeks and significantly higher BIC for OX implants after 6 weeks (p < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Both HSBA and OX implants were well integrated in bone and showed firm and increased stability from placement to after 6 weeks of healing. The HSBA implant showed more BIC after 10 days and the OX implant more BIC after 6 weeks of healing. The HSBA implant showed significantly higher shear strength after 3 and 6 weeks and higher RTQ values after 3 weeks than the OX implant. The results may be due to differences in surface roughness and hydrophilic properties.
© 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22487460     DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2012.00439.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Implant Dent Relat Res        ISSN: 1523-0899            Impact factor:   3.932


  13 in total

1.  Osseointegration of titanium implants with SLAffinity treatment: a histological and biomechanical study in miniature pigs.

Authors:  Keng-Liang Ou; Heng-Jui Hsu; Tzu-Sen Yang; Yun-Ho Lin; Chin-Sung Chen; Pei-Wen Peng
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2015-10-28       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Unravelling the effect of macro and microscopic design of dental implants on osseointegration: a randomised clinical study in minipigs.

Authors:  J V Ríos-Santos; A M Menjívar-Galán; M Herrero-Climent; B Ríos-Carrasco; A Fernández-Palacín; R A Perez; F J Gil
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2018-06-26       Impact factor: 3.896

3.  Histomorphometric and histologic evaluation of titanium-zirconium (aTiZr) implants with anodized surfaces.

Authors:  Ajay Sharma; A James McQuillan; Yo Shibata; Lavanya A Sharma; John Neil Waddell; Warwick John Duncan
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2016-03-12       Impact factor: 3.896

4.  In vivo comparison between the effects of chemically modified hydrophilic and anodically oxidized titanium surfaces on initial bone healing.

Authors:  Hyo-Jung Lee; Il-Hyung Yang; Seong-Kyun Kim; In-Sung Yeo; Taek-Ka Kwon
Journal:  J Periodontal Implant Sci       Date:  2015-05-15       Impact factor: 2.614

5.  Monitoring the Changes of Material Properties at Bone-Implant Interface during the Healing Process In Vivo: A Viscoelastic Investigation.

Authors:  Hsiang-Ho Chen; Wei-Yi Lai; Tze-Jian Chee; Ya-Hui Chan; Sheng-Wei Feng
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2017-03-08       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  Influence of surface treatment on osseointegration of dental implants: histological, histomorphometric and radiological analysis in vivo.

Authors:  José Luis Calvo-Guirado; Marta Satorres-Nieto; Antonio Aguilar-Salvatierra; Rafael Arcesio Delgado-Ruiz; José Eduardo Maté-Sánchez de Val; Jordi Gargallo-Albiol; Gerardo Gómez-Moreno; Georgios E Romanos
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2014-04-16       Impact factor: 3.573

7.  Biomechanical and histological evaluation of four different titanium implant surface modifications: an experimental study in the rabbit tibia.

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

8.  The osseointegration and stability of dental implants with different surface treatments in animal models: a network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chun-Ping Hao; Nan-Jue Cao; Yu-He Zhu; Wei Wang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-07-05       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Interfacial biomechanical properties of a dual acid-etched versus a chemically modified hydrophilic dual acid-etched implant surface: an experimental study in Beagles.

Authors:  Rainde Naiara Rezende de Jesus; Eunice Carrilho; Pedro V Antunes; Amílcar Ramalho; Camilla Christian Gomes Moura; Andreas Stavropoulos; Darceny Zanetta-Barbosa
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2018-09-27

10.  Comparison of sandblasted and acid-etched surface implants and new hydrophilic surface implants in the posterior maxilla using a 3-month early-loading protocol: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Hyeong Gi Kim; Pil-Young Yun; Young-Kyun Kim; Il-Hyung Kim
Journal:  J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2021-06-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.