Literature DB >> 23078340

In vivo evaluation of bioactive glass-based coatings on dental implants in a dog implantation model.

Bart A J A van Oirschot1, Hamdan S Alghamdi, Timo O Närhi, Sukumaran Anil, Abdullah Al Farraj Aldosari, Jeroen J J P van den Beucken, John A Jansen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Although titanium is commonly used as a favorable bone implant material due to its mechanical properties, its bioactive and osteoconductive capacity is relatively low. Calcium phosphate ceramics, predominantly hydroxyapatite (HA), have been frequently used for coating purposes to improve the bioactive properties. In view of the suggested osteopromotive capacity of bioactive glasses (BGs), this study aimed to evaluate the effect of BG incorporation into HA coatings on implant performance in terms of bone contact and bone area.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 48 screw-type titanium implants with magnetron sputter coatings containing different ratios of HA and BG (HA, HABGLow, and HABGHigh; n = 8) were placed into the mandible of 16 Beagle dogs. After 4 and 12 weeks, their performance was evaluated histologically and histomorphometrically. Peri-implant bone area percentage (BA%) was determined in three zones (inner, 0-500 μm; middle, 500-1000 μm; and outer, 1000-1500 μm). Additionally, bone-to-implant contact (BIC%) and first bone-implant contact (1st BIC) were assessed for each sample.
RESULTS: After 4 weeks, bone-to-implant contact for the HA- and HABGLow-coated groups was significantly higher (P < 0.05) than for the HABGHigh coatings. Mean values for overall BA% showed comparable values for both the HABGLow (58.3%)- and HABGHigh (56.3%)-coated groups. Data suggest that the relative BA around the HA-coated implants (67.8%) was higher, although this was only significant compared to the HABGHigh group. After 12 weeks, all three groups showed similar bone-to-implant contact and no differences in BA were found.
CONCLUSIONS: The incorporation of BG into HA sputter coatings did not enhance the performance of a dental implant in implantations sites with good bone quality and quantity. On the contrary, coatings containing high concentrations of BG resulted in inferior performance during the early postimplantation healing phase.
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bioactive glass; bone healing; bone-to-implant contact; dog model; hydroxyapatite; surface modification; titanium implants

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23078340     DOI: 10.1111/clr.12060

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res        ISSN: 0905-7161            Impact factor:   5.977


  7 in total

Review 1.  Tissue engineering for bone regeneration and osseointegration in the oral cavity.

Authors:  Sophia P Pilipchuk; Alexandra B Plonka; Alberto Monje; Andrei D Taut; Alejandro Lanis; Benjamin Kang; William V Giannobile
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2015-02-18       Impact factor: 5.304

2.  Silicon nitride enhances osteoprogenitor cell growth and differentiation via increased surface energy and formation of amide and nanocrystalline HA for craniofacial reconstruction.

Authors:  Kamal R Awad; Neelam Ahuja; Ami Shah; Henry Tran; Pranesh B Aswath; Marco Brotto; Venu Varanasi
Journal:  Med Devices Sens       Date:  2019-05-06

3.  Functionalised High-Performance Oxide Ceramics with Bone Morphogenic Protein 2 (BMP-2) Induced Ossification: An In Vivo Study.

Authors:  Filippo Migliorini; Jörg Eschweiler; Nicola Maffulli; Frank Hildebrand; Hanno Schenker
Journal:  Life (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-09

4.  Exposure of the murine RAW 264.7 macrophage cell line to dicalcium silicate coating: assessment of cytotoxicity and pro-inflammatory effects.

Authors:  Liangjiao Chen; Yanli Zhang; Jia Liu; Limin Wei; Bin Song; Longquan Shao
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 3.896

Review 5.  Bioactive Glass and Silicate-Based Ceramic Coatings on Metallic Implants: Open Challenge or Outdated Topic?

Authors:  Giulia Brunello; Hamada Elsayed; Lisa Biasetto
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2019-09-10       Impact factor: 3.623

Review 6.  Mesoporous Bioactive Glasses Cytocompatibility Assessment: A Review of In Vitro Studies.

Authors:  Margaux Salètes; Marta Vartin; Caroline Mocquot; Charlène Chevalier; Brigitte Grosgogeat; Pierre Colon; Nina Attik
Journal:  Biomimetics (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-23

7.  Shape Optimization of Bone-Bonding Subperiosteal Devices with Finite Element Analysis.

Authors:  Takeshi Ogasawara; Masayoshi Uezono; Kazuo Takakuda; Masanori Kikuchi; Shoichi Suzuki; Keiji Moriyama
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2017-12-17       Impact factor: 3.411

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.