Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

  • 제34권3호
  • /
  • Pages.285-292
  • /
  • 2008
  • /
  • 2234-7550(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-5930(eISSN)
대한구강악안면외과학회 (The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons)
권호 표지

미니돼지에서 발치 후 즉시 임플란트 매식시 치경부 표면처리가 골재생에 미치는 효과

THE EFFECT OF SURFACE TREATMENT OF THE CERVICAL AREA OF IMPLANT ON BONE REGENERATION IN MINI-PIG

  • 조진용 (전남대학교 치의학전문대학원 구강악안면외과) ;
  • 김영준 (전남대학교 치의학전문대학원 구강악안면외과) ;
  • 유민기 (전남대학교 치의학전문대학원 구강악안면외과) ;
  • 국민석 (전남대학교 치의학전문대학원 구강악안면외과) ;
  • 오희균 (전남대학교 치의학전문대학원 2단계 BK21, 전남대학교 치의학 연구소) ;
  • 박홍주 (전남대학교 치의학전문대학원 구강악안면외과)
  • Cho, Jin-Yong (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Kim, Young-Jun (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Yu, Min-Gi (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Kook, Min-Suk (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Oh, Hee-Kyun (2nd Stage of Brain Korea 21 for School of Dentistry, Dental Science Research Institute) ;
  • Park, Hong-Ju (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University)
  • 발행 : 2008.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Purpose: The present study was performed to evaluate the effect of surface treatment of the cervical area of implant on bone regeneration in fresh extraction socket following implant installation. Materials and methods: The four minipigs, 18 months old and 30 kg weighted, were used. Four premolars of the left side of both the mandible and maxilla were extracted. ${\phi}$3.3 mm and 11.5 mm long US II plus implants (Osstem Implant co., Korea) with resorbable blasting media (RBM) treated surface and US II implants (Osstem Implant co., Korea) with machined surface at the top and RBM surface at lower portion were installed in the socket. Stability of the implant was measured with $Osstell^{TM}$ (Model 6 Resonance Frequency Analyser: Integration Diagnostics Ltd., Sweden). After 2 months of healing, the procedures and measurement of implant stability were repeated in the right side by same method of left side. At four months after first experiment, the animals were sacrificed after measurement of stability of all implants, and biopsies were obtained. Results: Well healed soft tissue and no mobility of the implants were observed in both groups. Histologically satisfactory osseointegration of implants was observed with RBM surface, and no foreign body reaction as well as inflammatory infiltration around implant were found. Furthermore, substantial bone formation and high degree of osseointegration were exhibited at the marginal defects around the cervical area of US II plus implants. However, healing of US II implants was characterized by the incomplete bone substitution and the presence of the connective tissue zone between the implant and newly formed bone. The distance between the implant platform (P) and the most coronal level of bone-to-implant contact (B) after 2 months of healing was $2.66{\pm}0.11$ mm at US II implants group and $1.80{\pm}0.13$mm at US II plus implant group. The P-B distance after 4 months of healing was $2.29{\pm}0.13$mm at US II implants group and $1.25{\pm}0.10$mm at US II plus implants group. The difference between both groups regarding the length of P-B distance was statistically significant(p<0.05). Concerning the resonance frequency analysis (RFA) value, the stability of US II plus implants group showed relatively higher RFA value than US II implants group. Conclusion: The current results suggest that implants with rough surface at the cervical area have an advantage in process of bone regeneration on defect around implant placed in a fresh extraction socket.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Branemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, Breine U, Lindstrom U, Hellen O, Oman A: Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1977;16:1-132
  2. Schulte W: The intraosseous $Al_2O_3(Frialit^{\circledR})$ Tubingen implant. Developmental status after 8 years. J Quintessence Int 1984;15:9-26
  3. Krump JL, Barnett BG: The immediate implant: a treatment alternative. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:19-23
  4. Schwartz-Arad D, Chaushu G: The ways and wherefores of immediate placement of implants into fresh extraction sites: a literature review. J Periodontol 1997;68:915-923 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1997.68.10.915
  5. Albrektsson T, Br?nemark PI, Hansson HA, Lindstrom J: Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. Acta Orthop Scand 1981;52:155-170 https://doi.org/10.3109/17453678108991776
  6. Cooper LF: A role of surface topography in creating and maintaining bone at titanium endosseous implants. J Prosth Dent 2000;84:522-534 https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2000.111966
  7. Gottlander M, Albrektsson T: Histomorphometric studies of hydroxyapatite- coated and uncoated CP titanium threaded implants in bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:399-404
  8. Wennerberg A, Ektessabi A, Albrektsson T, Johansson C, Andersson B: A 1-year follow up of implants of differing surface roughness placed in rabbit bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 1997;12:486-494
  9. Botticelli D, Berglundh T, Lindhe J: Resolution of bone defects of varying dimension and configuration in the marginal portion of the peri-implant bone. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 2004;31:309-31 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00502.x
  10. Akimoto K, Becker W, Persson R, Baker DA, Rohrer MD, O' 'Neal RB: Evaluation of titanium implants placed into simulated extraction sockets: a study in dogs. Int J of Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:351-360
  11. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T, Andersson B, Krol J: A histomorphometric and removal torque study of screw-shaped titanium. Clin Oral Implants Res 1995;6:24-30 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1995.060103.x
  12. Cochran DL, Schenk RK, Lussi A, Higginbotton FL, Buser D: Bone response to unloaded and loaded titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: A Histomorphometric study in canine mandible. J Biomed Mater Res 1998;40:1-11 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199804)40:1<1::AID-JBM1>3.0.CO;2-Q
  13. Denissen HW, Kalk W, Nieuport HM, Maltha JC, Hoofe A: Mandibular bone response to plasma-sprayed coatings of hydroxyapatite. Int J Prosthodont 1990;3:53-58
  14. Stentz WC, Mealey BL, Gunsolley JC, Waldrop TC: Effects of guided bone regeneration around commercially pure titanium and hydroxyapatite-coated dental implants. II. Histologic analysis. J Periodontol 1997;68:933-949 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1997.68.10.933
  15. Davies JE: Mechanisms of endosseous integration. Int J Prosthodont 1998;11:391-401
  16. Berglundh T, Lindhe J, Jonsson K, Ericsson I: The topography of the vascular systems in the periodontal and peri-implant tissues in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 1994;21:129-193
  17. Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T, Linder E, Lang NP, Lindhe J: Early bone formation adjacent to rough and turned endosseous implant surfaces. An experimental study in the dog. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:381-392 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01082.x
  18. Marinho VC, Celletti R, Bracchetti G: Sandblasted and Acidetched Dental Implants: A histologic study in Rats. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 2003;18:75-81
  19. Botticelli D, Berglundh T, Persson LG, Lindhe J: Bone regeneration at implants with turned or rough surfaces in self-contained defects. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 2005;32:448-455 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00693.x
  20. Schropp L, Wenzel A, Kostopoulos L, Karring T: Bone healing and soft tissue contour changes following single-tooth extraction: a clinical and radiographic 12-month prospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2003;23:313-323
  21. Araujo MG, Lindhe J: Dimensional ridge alterations following tooth extraction. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 2005;32:212-218 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00642.x
  22. Araujo MG, Sukekava F, Wennstrom JL, Lindhe J: Ridge alterations following implant placement in fresh extraction sockets: an experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 2005; 32:645-652 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00726.x
  23. Sennerby L, Roos J: Surgical determinants of clinical success of osseointegrated oral implants: a review of the literature. Int J Prosthodont 1998;11:408-20
  24. Meredith N: Assessment of implant stability as a prognostic determinant. Int J Prosthodont 1998;11:491-501
  25. Barewall RM, Oates TW, Meredith N, Cochran DL: Resonance frequency measurement of implant stability in vivo on implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface. Int J Oral Maxillofac implants 2003;18:641-651
  26. Rasmusson L, Meredith N, Cho IH, Sennerby L: The influence of simultaneous versus delayed placement on the stability of titanium implants in onlay bone grafts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;28:224-231 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0901-5027(99)80143-X
  27. Wilson T Jr, Schenk R, Buser D, Cochran D: Implants placed in immediate extraction sites: A report of histologic and histometric analysis of human biopsies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:333-341