Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (대한구강악안면외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative study of removal torque of 3 different hydroxyapatite coated implants in the femur of rabbits

가토의 대퇴골에 식립한 3종류의 수산화인회석 코팅 임플란트에 대한 제거회전력 비교 연구

  • Kim, Sang-Soo (Division of Oral and Maxillofacial, Department of Dentistry, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center) ;
  • Lee, Ju-Hyung (Division of Oral and Maxillofacial, Department of Dentistry, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center) ;
  • Yu, Seok-Hyun (Division of Oral and Maxillofacial, Department of Dentistry, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center) ;
  • Lee, Hyung-Ju (Division of Oral and Maxillofacial, Department of Dentistry, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center) ;
  • Moon, Jee-Won (Division of Oral and Maxillofacial, Department of Dentistry, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center) ;
  • Park, In-Sook (Division of Oral and Maxillofacial, Department of Dentistry, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center) ;
  • Sohn, Dong-Seok (Division of Oral and Maxillofacial, Department of Dentistry, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center)
  • 김상수 (대구가톨릭대학병원 치과 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 이주형 (대구가톨릭대학병원 치과 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 유석현 (대구가톨릭대학병원 치과 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 이형주 (대구가톨릭대학병원 치과 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 문지원 (대구가톨릭대학병원 치과 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 박인숙 (대구가톨릭대학병원 치과 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 손동석 (대구가톨릭대학병원 치과 구강악안면외과학교실)
  • Received : 2010.11.10
  • Accepted : 2011.02.10
  • Published : 2011.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Introduction: This study compared the strength of osseointegration as determined by the resistance to reverse torque rotation of three different hydroxyapatite coated implants in the rabbit femur model. Materials and Methods: Three hydroxyapatite coated implants (HAPTITE), Tapered Screw-Vent (TSV) and BioTite-H - were used. A total of 40 implants were placed in the femur of 20 adult male rabbits. The animals were divided into two groups. In group A (n=10); one HAPTITE was placed into each right femur and one TSV was placed into each left femur. In group B (n=10); one HAPTITE was placed into each right femur and one BioTite-H was placed into each left femur. Five rabbits of each group were sacrificed at 4 and 8 weeks. The implants were removed by reverse torque rotation using a digital torque-measuring device. A total of 40 implants in 20 rabbits were used for the removal torque measurements. Results: In the Group A, 4 weeks after implant placement, the mean removal torque for the HAPTITE and TSV was $70.7{\pm}31.6$ N cm and $28.9{\pm}15.1$ N cm, respectively. Eight weeks after implant placement, the mean removal torque for the HAPTITE and TSV was $87.9{\pm}26.2$ N cm and $54.9{\pm}22.4$ N cm, respectively. In the Group B, 4 weeks after implant placement, the mean removal torque for the HAPTITE and BioTite-H was $58.0{\pm}29.6$ N cm and $37.7{\pm}14.1$ N cm, respectively. Eight weeks after implant placement, the mean removal torque for the HAPTITE and BioTite-H was $91.4{\pm}47.1$ N cm and $30.8{\pm}9.8$ N cm. HAPTITE showed a higher removal torque than the other implants. Conclusion: These results suggest that HAPTITE increases the strength of osseointegration significantly as determined by the resistance to reverse torque rotation.

Keywords

References

  1. Branemark PI, Adell R, Breine U, Hansson BO, Lindstrom J, Ohlsson A. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. Experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1969;3:81-100. https://doi.org/10.3109/02844316909036699
  2. Hutton JE, Heath MR, Chai JY, Harnett J, Jemt T, Johns RB, et al. Factors related to success and failure rates at 3-year follow-up in a multicenter study of overdentures supported by Branemark implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:33-42.
  3. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The longterm efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986;1: 11-25.
  4. Shirakura M, Fujii N, Ohnishi H, Taguchi Y, Ohshima H, Nomura S, et al. Tissue response to titanium implantation in the rat maxilla, with special reference to the effects of surface conditions on bone formation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003;14:687-96. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0905-7161.2003.00960.x
  5. Franchi M, Fini M, Martini D, Orsini E, Leonardi L, Ruggeri A, et al. Biological fixation of endosseous implants. Micron 2005;36:665-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micron.2005.05.010
  6. Predecki P, Auslaender BA, Stephan JE, Mooney VL, Stanitski C. Attachment of bone to threaded implants by ingrowth and mechanical interlocking. J Biomed Mater Res 1972;6:401-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820060507
  7. Cook SD, Kay JF, Thomas KA, Jarcho M. Interface mechanics and histology of titanium and hydroxylapatite-coated titanium for dental implant applications. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1987;2:15-22.
  8. Vercaigne S, Wolke JG, Naert I, Jansen JA. Histomorphometrical and mechanical evaluation of titanium plasma-spray-coated implants placed in the cortical bone of goats. J Biomed Mater Res 1998;41:41-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199807)41:1<41::AID-JBM5>3.0.CO;2-Q
  9. Buser D, Schenk RK, Steinemann S, Fiorellini JP, Fox CH, Stich H. Influence of surface characteristics on bone integration of titanium implants. A histomorphometric study in miniature pigs. J Biomed Mater Res 1991;25:889-902. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820250708
  10. Cochran DL, Schenk RK, Lussi A, Higginbottom FL, Buser D. Bone response to unloaded and loaded titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a histometric study in the 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
  11. Soballe K, Hansen ES, Brockstedt-Rasmussen H, Pedersen CM, Bunger C. Hydroxyapatite coating enhances fixation of porous coated implants. A comparison in dogs between press fit and noninterference fit. Acta Orthop Scand 1990;61:299-306. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453679008993521
  12. Block MS, Kent JN, Kay JF. Evaluation of hydroxylapatite-coated titanium dental implants in dogs. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1987;45:601-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(87)90270-9
  13. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T, Andersson B, Krol JJ. A histomorphometric and removal torque study of screw-shaped titanium implants with three different surface topographies. Clin Oral Implants Res 1995;6:24-30. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1995.060103.x
  14. Kumar M, Dasarathy H, Riley C. Electrodeposition of brushite coatings and their transformation to hydroxyapatite in aqueous solutions. J Biomed Mater Res 1999;45:302-10. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(19990615)45:4<302::AID-JBM4>3.0.CO;2-A
  15. Baker D, London RM, O'Neal R. Rate of pull-out strength gain of dual-etched titanium implants: a comparative study in rabbits. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:722-8.
  16. 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.
  17. Cooper LF, Masuda T, Yliheikkila PK, Felton DA. Generalizations regarding the process and phenomenon of osseointegration. Part II. In vitro studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13: 163-74.
  18. Rich A, Harris AK. Anomalous preferences of cultured macrophages for hydrophobic and roughened substrata. J Cell Sci 1981;50:1-7.
  19. Johansson C, Albrektsson T. Integration of screw implants in the rabbit: a 1-year follow-up of removal torque of titanium implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1987;2:69-75.
  20. Sakakura CE, Margonar R, Holzhausen M, Nociti FH Jr, Alba RC Jr, Marcantonio E Jr. Influence of cyclosporin A therapy on bone healing around titanium implants: a histometric and biomechanic study in rabbits. J Periodontol 2003;74:976-81. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2003.74.7.976
  21. 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.
  22. Ivanoff CJ, Widmark G, Johansson C, Wennerberg A. Histologic evaluation of bone response to oxidized and turned titanium micro- implants in human jawbone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:341-8.
  23. Roberts WE, Garreto LP. Bone physiology and metabolism. In: Misch CE, ed. Contemporary implant dentistry. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Mosby Co.; 1999:234-5.
  24. Misch CM. Hydroxylapatite-coated implants. Design considerations and clinical parameters. N Y State Dent J 1993;59:36-41. Erratum in: N Y State Dent J 1993;59:12.
  25. Davies JE, Lowenberg B, Shiga A. The bone-titanium interface in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res 1990;24:1289-306. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820241003
  26. Yang Y, Bumgardner JD, Cavin R, Carnes DL, Ong JL. Osteoblast precursor cell attachment on heat-treated calcium phosphate coatings. J Dent Res 2003;82:449-53. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910308200609
  27. Cleries L, Fernandez-Pradas JM, Sardin G, Morenza JL. Dissolution behaviour of calcium phosphate coatings obtained by laser ablation. Biomaterials 1998;19:1483-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(98)00063-5