The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A histomorphometric study of dental implants with different surface characteristics

  • Pak, Hyun-Soon (Department of Prosthodontics, Graduate School, Seoul National University) ;
  • Yeo, In-Sung (Department of Prosthodontics, Graduate School, Seoul National University) ;
  • Yang, Jae-Ho (Department of Prosthodontics, Graduate School, Seoul National University)
  • Received : 2010.10.14
  • Accepted : 2010.12.16
  • Published : 2010.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. One of the major keys to achieve successful osseointegration of the implant is its surface properties. The aim of this study was to investigate the bone response to dental implants with different surface characteristics using the rabbit tibia model. Tricalcium phosphate (TCP) coated, anodic oxidized and turned (control) surfaces were compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Seventy two implants were placed in the tibia of eighteen rabbits. Nine rabbits were sacrificed at 3 weeks of healing and the remaining nine were sacrificed at 6 weeks of healing. The bone-to-implant contact (BIC) and the bone volume density (BVD) were assessed by light microscope after 3 and 6 weeks of healing. RESULTS. Statistical analysis showed that no significant differences in the BIC and BVD were observed between the different implant surfaces and the control group at 3 weeks and 6 weeks of healing. Data also suggested that the BVD of all the surfaces showed significant difference at 3 and 6 weeks. CONCLUSION. The present study has showed that osseointegration occurred in all investigated types of surface-treated implants. In the current study all of the threads of the implants were observed to calculate BIC and BVD values (instead of choosing some of the threads from the bone cortex for example), which didn't make BIC or BVD percentage values better than in the control group, therefore the clinical relevance of these results remains to be shown.

Keywords

References

  1. Albrektsson T, Branemark 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;52:155-70. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453678108991776
  2. Kasemo B, Lausmaa J. Surface science aspects on inorganic biomaterials. CRC Crit Rev Clin Neurobiol 1986;4:335-80.
  3. Kim YH, Koak JY, Chang IT, Wennerberg A, Heo SJ. A histomorphometric analysis of the effects of various surface treatment methods on osseointegration. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:349-56.
  4. Pilliar RM. Overview of surface variability of metallic endosseous dental implants: textured and porous surface-structured designs. Implant Dent 1998;7:305-14. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-199807040-00009
  5. Cooper LF. A role for surface topography in creating and maintaining bone at titanium endosseous implants. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:522-34. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2000.111966
  6. Masuda T, Yliheikkila PK, Felton DA, Cooper LF. Generalizations regarding the process and phenomenon of osseointegration. Part I. In vivo studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:17-29.
  7. Kieswetter K, Schwartz Z, Hummert TW, Cochran DL, Simpson J, Dean DD, Boyan BD. Surface roughness modulates the local production of growth factors and cytokines by osteoblast-like MG-63 cells. J Biomed Mater Res 1996;32:55-63. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199609)32:1<55::AID-JBM7>3.0.CO;2-O
  8. Larsson C, Thomsen P, Lausmaa J, Rodahl M, Kasemo B, Ericson LE. Bone response to surface modified titanium implants: studies on electropolished implants with different oxide thicknesses and morphology. Biomaterials 1994;15:1062-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(94)90092-2
  9. Yeo IS, Han JS, Yang JH. Biomechanical and histomorphometric study of dental implants with different surface characteristics. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2008;87:303-11.
  10. Bowers KT, Keller JC, Randolph BA, Wick DG, Michaels CM. Optimization of surface micromorphology for enhanced osteoblast responses in vitro. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992;7:302-10.
  11. Schwartz Z, Martin JY, Dean DD, Simpson J, Cochran DL, Boyan BD. Effect of titanium surface roughness on chondrocyte proliferation, matrix production, and differentiation depends on the state of cell maturation. J Biomed Mater Res 1996;30:145-55. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199602)30:2<145::AID-JBM3>3.0.CO;2-R
  12. Martin JY, Schwartz Z, Hummert TW, Schraub DM, Simpson J, Lankford J Jr, Dean DD, Cochran DL, Boyan BD. Effect of titanium surface roughness on proliferation, differentiation, and protein synthesis of human osteoblast-like cells (MG63). J Biomed Mater Res 1995;29:389-401. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820290314
  13. Sun L, Berndt CC, Gross KA, Kucuk A. Material fundamentals and clinical performance of plasma-sprayed hydroxyapatite coatings: a review. J Biomed Mater Res 2001;58:570-92. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.1056
  14. Park EK, Lee YE, Choi JY, Oh SH, Shin HI, Kim KH, Kim SY, Kim S. Cellular biocompatibility and stimulatory effects of calcium metaphosphate on osteoblastic differentiation of human bone marrow-derived stromal cells. Biomaterials 2004;25:3403-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.10.031
  15. Fini M, Cigada A, Rondelli G, Chiesa R, Giardino R, Giavaresi G, Nicoli Aldini N, Torricelli P, Vicentini B. In vitro and in vivo behaviour of Ca- and P-enriched anodized titanium. Biomaterials 1999;20:1587-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(99)00060-5
  16. Sykaras N, Iacopino AM, Marker VA, Triplett RG, Woody RD. Implant materials, designs, and surface topographies: their effect on osseointegration. A literature review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:675-90.
  17. Ellingsen JE. Surface configurations of dental implants. Periodontol 2000 1998;17:36-46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0757.1998.tb00121.x
  18. Larsson C, Thomsen P, Aronsson BO, Rodahl M, Lausmaa J, Kasemo B, Ericson LE. Bone response to surface-modified titanium implants: studies on the early tissue response to machined and electropolished implants with different oxide thicknesses. Biomaterials 1996;17:605-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(96)88711-4
  19. Donath K, Breuner G. A method for the study of undecalcified bones and teeth with attached soft tissues. The Sage-Schliff (sawing and grinding) technique. J Oral Pathol 1982;11:318-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0714.1982.tb00172.x
  20. Meredith N. Assessment of implant stability as a prognostic determinant. Int J Prosthodont 1998;11:491-501.
  21. Larsson C, Emanuelsson L, Thomsen P, Ericson LE, Aronsson BO, Kasemo B, Lausmaa J. Bone response to surface modified titanium implants - studies on the tissue response after 1 year to machined and electropolished implants with different oxide thicknesses. J Mater Sci Mater Med 1997;8:721-9. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018548225899
  22. Ducheyne P, Beight J, Cuckler J, Evans B, Radin S. Effect of calcium phosphate coating characteristics on early post-operative bone tissue ingrowth. Biomaterials 1990;11:531-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(90)90073-Y
  23. Chae JC, Collier JP, Mayor MB, Surprenant VA, Dauphinais LA. Enhanced ingrowth of porous-coated CoCr implants plasmasprayed with tricalcium phosphate. J Biomed Mater Res 1992;26:93-102. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820260109
  24. Schopper C, Moser D, Goriwoda W, Ziya-Ghazvini F, Spassova E, Lagogiannis G, Auterith A, Ewers R. The effect of three different calcium phosphate implant coatings on bone deposition and coating resorption: a long-term histological study in sheep. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:357-68. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01080.x
  25. Clemens JA, Klein CP, Sakkers RJ, Dhert WJ, de Groot K, Rozing PM. Healing of gaps around calcium phosphate-coated implants in trabecular bone of the goat. J Biomed Mater Res 1997;36:55-64. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199707)36:1<55::AID-JBM7>3.0.CO;2-K
  26. Lee TM, Wang BC, Yang YC, Chang E, Yang CY. Comparison of plasma-sprayed hydroxyapatite coatings and hydroxyapatite/tricalcium phosphate composite coatings: in vivo study. J Biomed Mater Res 2001;55:360-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4636(20010605)55:3<360::AID-JBM1040>3.0.CO;2-Q
  27. Geesink RS, Groot KD, Klein CP. Bonding of bone to apatitecoated implants. J Bone Joint Surg 1988;70B:17-22.
  28. Sennerby L, Thomsen P, Ericson LE. Early tissue response to titanium implants inserted in rabbit cortical bone. part 1. Light microscopic observations. J Mater Sci Mater Med 1993;4:240-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00122275
  29. Sennerby L, Thomsen P, Ericson LE. A morphometric and biomechanic comparison of titanium implants inserted in rabbit cortical and cancellous bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992;7:62-71.
  30. Biesbrock AR, Edgerton M. Evaluation of the clinical predictability of hydroxyapatite-coated endosseous dental implants: a review of the literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:712-20.
  31. Schliephake H, Scharnweber D, Roesseler S, Dard M, Sewing A, Aref A. Biomimetic calcium phosphate composite coating of dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21:738-46.

Cited by

  1. Systematic review of animal models for the study of implant integration, assessing the influence of material, surface and design vol.39, pp.03036979, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01835.x
  2. Physical stability of arginine-glycine-aspartic acid peptide coated on anodized implants after installation vol.5, pp.2, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2013.5.2.84
  3. Biomechanical and histological evaluation of four different titanium implant surface modifications: an experimental study in the rabbit tibia vol.18, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-1120-2
  4. and osseointegration in a rabbit model vol.104, pp.8, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.35739
  5. Dental implant surfaces after insertion in bone: an in vitro study in four commercial implant systems pp.1436-3771, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2262-4
  6. Effect of the Acid-Etching on Grit-Blasted Dental Implants to Improve Osseointegration: Histomorphometric Analysis of the Bone-Implant Contact in the Rabbit Tibia Model vol.11, pp.11, 2010, https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings11111426