Search

Purpose: To qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate histologic osseointegration parameters of implants designed with decompressing vertical chambers between the threads with two different surface treatments (TiO 2 blasting + maleic acid vs TiO 2 blasting + maleic + HCl) in a large translational animal model at 3 and 6 weeks in vivo., Materials and Methods: Nine female sheep were used, and 72 implants with trapezoidal threads and decompressing vertical chambers of 0.6 mm in diameter and 0.2 mm in depth were placed in the ilium crest. After 3 and 6 weeks, the animals were euthanized, and biomechanical and histomophometric analyses were performed., Results: Survey histologic evaluation indicated intimate contact between the bone and the implants independent of surface treatment at both times in vivo. Bone formation at both time points depicted an intramembranous-type healing pattern between the implant threads. The mean removal torque values for all groups showed a relative increase in removal torque from 3 to 6 weeks. In terms of bone area fraction occupancy analysis, significant differences were found at 6 weeks between surface treatments (P = .046), where the experimental surface yielded higher degrees of bone area fraction occupancy., Conclusion: Conical implants with decompressing vertical chambers between threads presented similar osseointegration parameters regarding bone-toimplant contact and torque-out test values irrespective of surface treatment. However, shifting from a minimally rough to a moderately rough surface (experimental surface with supplemental acid-etching) resulted in significantly improved bone area fraction occupancy at 6 weeks.

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of two surface modifications on early osseointegration parameters of conical implants in a translational pre-clinical model., Materials and Methods: Conical implants with progressive trapezoidal threads and healing chambers were evaluated consisting of two different surface conditions: 1) Implacil surface (IMP Sur), and 2) Implacil surface + Supplemental Acid-etching (IMP Sur + AE). Surface characterization comprised of the evaluation of roughness parameters (S a , S q and S dr ), surface energy and contact angle. Subsequently, implants were installed in the ilium crest of nine female sheep (weighing ~65 kg). Torque out, histological and histomorphometric analyses were conducted after 3 and 6 weeks in-vivo. The percentage of bone to implant contact (%BIC) and bone area fraction occupancy within implant threads (%BAFO) were quantified, and the results were analyzed using a general linear mixed model analysis as function of surface treatment and time in-vivo., Results: Supplemental acid etching significantly increased S a and S q roughness parameters without compromising the surface energy or contact angle, and no significant differences with respect to S dr . Torque-out testing yielded significantly higher values for IMP Sur + AE in comparison to the IMP Sur at 3- (62.78 ± 15 and 33.49 ± 15 N.cm, respectively) and 6-weeks (60.74 ± 15 and 39.80 ± 15 N.cm, respectively). Histological analyses depicted similar osseointegration features for both surfaces, where an intramembranous-type healing pattern was observed. At histomorphometric analyses, IMP Sur + AE implants yielded higher values of BIC in comparison to IMP Sur at 3- (40.48 ± 38 and 27.98 ± 38%, respectively) and 6-weeks (45.86 ± 38 and 34.46 ± 38%, respectively). Both groups exhibited a significant increase in %BAFO from 3 (~35%) to 6 weeks (~44%), with no significant differences between surface treatments., Conclusion: Supplemental acid-etching and its interplay with implant thread design, positively influenced the BIC and torque-out resistance at early stages of osseointegration., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to qualitatively and quantitatively assess the effect of osteotomy preparation by conventional, subtractive, or osseodensification instrumentation on osteotomies, treated with or without endosteal implants, and healing capacity., Materials and Methods: Seven sheep were used, and 56 osteotomies were made in the left and right ilium of the sheep (n = 8/sheep [4 per side/time point (3 and 6 weeks)]). Two different instrumentation techniques were used: (1) conventional/regular drilling in a three-step series of a 2-mm pilot and 3.2-mm and 3.8-mm twist drills and (2) osseodensification drilling with a Densah Bur 2.0-mm pilot and 2.8-mm and 3.8-mm multi-fluted tapered burs. Drilling was performed at 1,100 rpm with saline irrigation., Results: Qualitative histomorphometric evaluation of the osteotomies after 3 and 6 weeks did not indicate any healing impairment due to the instrumentation. In all samples, histologic examination suggested bone remodeling and growth (empty and treated with an implant), irrespective of preparation technique. Osteotomies prepared using the osseodensification instrumentation showed the existence of bone chips autografted into the trabecular spaces along the length of the osteotomy wall., Conclusion: The osseodensification group yielded higher osseointegration rates, as distinguished through qualitative assessment, bone-to-implant contact, and bone-area-fraction occupancy, indicating an increased osteogenic potential in osteotomies prepared using the osseodensification technique.

Purpose: The aim of the present study was to systematically analyze how a multifactorial surgical instrumentation approach affects osseointegration on both narrow-diameter and wide-diameter short implants., Materials and Methods: Twelve skeletally mature female sheep were used in the study along with 144 plateau-root-form healing chamber titanium (Ti-6Al-4V) implants (Bicon LLC, Boston, MA), evenly distributed between narrow (3.5 mm) and wide (6.0 mm) diameters. The presence or the absence of irrigation, different drilling speeds, and 2 time points quantifying bone-implant contact (BIC) and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO) to evaluate the osteogenic parameters around the implants., Results: There were no signs of inflammation, infection, or failure of the implants observed at either healing period. The narrow 3.5-mm implant, at 6 weeks, yielded significant differences in terms of BIC at a drilling speed of 50 rotations per minute (RPM), with higher values of the samples using irrigation (30.6 ± 6.1%) compared with those without (19.7 ± 6.1%). No statistical differences were detected for 500 and 1,000 RPM with or without irrigation. The wide 6-mm diameter implant showed differences with respect to drilling speed, 500 and 1,000 RPM, with higher values associated with samples subjected to irrigation. BAFO results, for both diameters, only detected statistical differences between the 2 times (3 vs 6 weeks); no statistical differences were detected when evaluating as a function of time, drilling speed, and irrigation., Conclusions: Surgical instrumentation variables (ie, drilling speed [RPM] and irrigation) yielded to be more of an effect for BIC at longer healing time (6 weeks) for the wider implants. Furthermore, deploying narrow or wide plateau-root-form implants, where conditions allow, has shown to be a safe alternative, considering the high BIC and BAFO values observed, independent of irrigation., (Copyright © 2020 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this work was to evaluate osseointegration of endosteal implants with two different surface treatments at early stages (~3 weeks) in the tibia of healthy and ovariectomized rabbits., Materials and Methods: The study comprised 10 adult New Zealand female rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus; 6 months and 3.0 ± 0.5 kg). Five animals were subjected to bilateral ovariectomy to mimic osteoporotic-like conditions, and the remaining rabbits (n = 5) served as the healthy control group. After 3 months, specimens from the ovariectomized and control groups were subject to implant placement in both tibiae, using two different types of surface treatment. A total of 36 implants were placed, n = 18 acid-etched and n = 18 anodized. After 3 weeks, euthanasia of the animals was performed, and samples were obtained for processing. Bone-to-implant contact and bone area fraction occupancy were quantified to evaluate the osseointegration parameters around the implant surface and within the thread area, respectively, and nanoindentation tests were performed to determine elastic modulus and hardness of the new bone. Both analyses were performed on the entire implant (total), as well as individually within the cortical and bone marrow cavity area., Results: All animals were evaluated with no signs of infection or postoperative complications. The total bone-to-implant contact and bone area fraction occupancy results, independent of surface treatment, yielded significant differences between the ovariectomized and control groups (P = .002 and P < .001, respectively). In the marrow cavity, analyzing the surface treatments independently as a function of bone condition, the only differences detected were in the anodized treatment (P = .04). Regarding the elastic modulus, differences were detected only with the anodized implants between the ovariectomized and control groups (P = .015)., Conclusion: At 3 weeks after implant placement, there were better osseointegration values of the implants in the healthy control group compared with the ovariectomized group independent of surface treatment. Also, specifically in the medullary region of the rabbit tibia, the acid-etched implants had more uniform osseointegration values in conditions of low-quality bone in comparison to the anodized implants, histomorphometrically and biomechanically.

Copyright of Implant Dentistry is the property of Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)