Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

Korean Association of Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한악안면성형재건외과학회)
권호 표지

Retrospective Study of Sandblasted, Large-grit and Acid-etched Implant

Sandblasted, Large-grit and Acid-etched Implant에 대한 후향적 임상 연구

  • Jo, Ji-Ho (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Kim, Su-Gwan (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Moon, Seong-Yong (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Oh, Ji-Su (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Park, Jin-Ju (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Jung, Jong-Won (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Yoon, Dae-Woong (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Yang, Seong-Su (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Jeong, Mi-Ae (Department of Dental Hygiene, Kangwon National University)
  • 조지호 (조선대학교 치의학전문대학원 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 김수관 (조선대학교 치의학전문대학원 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 문성용 (조선대학교 치의학전문대학원 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 오지수 (조선대학교 치의학전문대학원 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 박진주 (조선대학교 치의학전문대학원 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 정종원 (조선대학교 치의학전문대학원 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 윤대웅 (조선대학교 치의학전문대학원 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 양성수 (조선대학교 치의학전문대학원 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 정미애 (강원대학교 치위생학과)
  • Received : 2011.02.18
  • Accepted : 2011.04.25
  • Published : 2011.07.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This study evaluated the prognosis and survival rate of SLA (Sandblasted, Large-grit and Acid-etched) implants and it also evaluated the prosthodontic complications and the associated factors. Methods: Twenty seven patients (14 men and 13 women, mean age: 54.9) who visited Chosun University Hospital Implant Center with the chief desire for placement of an implant in an edentulous area from March, 2008 to December 2008 and who received placement of a SLA implant ($Implantium^{(R)}$, Dentium Co., Korea) were selected for this study. Results: The average follow-up period was 15 months and the study was based on the treatment records, radiographs and clinical examinations. A total of 69 implant cases were retrospectively assessed for the width and length of the implant, the primary and secondary stability, the combined surgery, the employed bone graft material and barrier membrane, the status of the opposing tooth, implant failure and the prosthetic complications. During the follow-up period (average: 15 months), the accumulative survival rate of the 69 implants in 27 patients was 100%. Complications such as infection, sinusitis and fixture exposure after surgery were seen for 5 implants in 4 patients. Complications such as screw loosening, contact loosening and peri-implant gingivitis after prosthodontic treatment occurred in 7 cases (10.14%). Conclusion: This study reports placement of SLA implants may cause various complications, yet the final accumulative survival rate was 100%. The SLA implant ($Implantium^{(R)}$) has an excellent clinical survival rate and outcome.

Keywords

References

  1. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rocler B, Br$\aa$nemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10:387-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(81)80077-4
  2. Adell, R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U, Br$\aa$nemark PI, Jemt T Long-term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:347-59.
  3. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T, Andersson B. Design and surface characteristics of 13 commercially available oral implant systems. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993;8:622-33.
  4. Cochran DL. A comparison of endosseous dental implant surfaces. J Periodontol 1999;70:1523-39. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1999.70.12.1523
  5. Shalabi MM, Gortemaker A, Van't Hof MA, Jansen JA, Creugers NH. Implant surface roughness and bone healing: a systematic review. J Dent Res 2006;85:496-500. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910608500603
  6. Martin JY, Schwartz Z, Hummert TW, et al. 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
  7. Pebe P, Barbot R, Trinidad J, et al. Countertorque testing and histomorphometric analysis of various implant surfaces in canines: a pilot study. Implant Dent 1997;6:259-65. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-199700640-00002
  8. Postiglione L, Di Domenico G, Ramaglia L, et al. Behavior of SaOS-2 cells cultured on different titanium surfaces. J Dent Res 2003;82:692-6. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910308200907
  9. Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, et al. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:161-72. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080302.x
  10. Takeshita F, Iyama S, Ayukawa Y, Akedo H, Suetsugu T. Study of bone formation around dense hydroxyapatite implants using light microscopy, image processing and confocal laser scanning microscopy. Biomaterials 1997;18: 317-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(96)00143-3
  11. Ishizawa H, Fujino M, Ogino M. Mechanical and histological investigation of hydrothermally treated and untreated anodic titanium oxide films containing Ca and P. J Biomed Mater Res 1995;29:1459-68. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820291118
  12. Gotfredsen K, Wennerberg A, Johansson C, Skovgaard LT, Hjørting-Hansen E. Anchorage of TiO2-blasted, HA-coated, and machined implants: an experimental study with rabbits. J Biomed Mater Res 1995;29:1223-31. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820291009
  13. De Lange GL, De Putter C, De Wijs FL. Histological and ultrastructural appearance of the hydroxyapatite-bone interface. J Biomed Mater Res 1990;24:829-45. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820240704
  14. Inoue T, Matsuzaka K, Yoshinari M, Abiko Y, Shimono M. Implant-bone tissue interface. Bull Kanagawa Dent College 1999;27:132-41.
  15. Tamura M, Tanaka O, Maida T. A 5-year clinical study of hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated implants. J Jpn Prosthodont Soc 1997;41:620-8. https://doi.org/10.2186/jjps.41.620
  16. Kent JN, Block MS, Finger IM, Duerra L, Larsen H, Misiek DJ. Biointegrated hydroxyapatite-coated dental implants: 5-year clinical observations. J Am Dent Asoc 1990;121: 138-44. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1990.0138
  17. Mimura K, Watanabe K, Okawa S, Kobayashi M, Miyakawa O. Morphological and chemical characterizations of the interface of a hydroxyapatite-coated implant. Dent Mater J 2004;23:353-60. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.23.353
  18. Diniz MG, Soares GA, Coelho MJ, Fernandes MH. Surface topography modulates the osteogenesis in human bone marrow cell cultures grown on titanium samples prepared by a combination of mechanical and acid treatments. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2002;13:421-32. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014357122284
  19. Taborelli M, Jobin M, Francois P, et al. Influence of surface treatments developed for oral implants on the physical and biological properties of titanium. (I) Surface Characterization. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:208-16. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080307.x
  20. Takeuchi M, Abe Y, Yoshida Y, Nakayama Y, Okazaki M, Akagawa Y. Acid pretreatment of titanium implants. Biomaterials 2003;24:1821-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(02)00576-8
  21. Jeong R, Marin C, Granato R, et al. Early bone healing around implant surfaces treated with variations in the resorbable blasting media method. A study in rabbits. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2010;15:119-25.
  22. Cochran DL, Buser D, ten Bruggenkate CM, et al. The use of reduced healing times on ITI implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) surface: early results from clinical trials on ITI SLA implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13: 144-53. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130204.x
  23. 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
  24. Larsson C, Emanuelsson L, Thomsen P, et al. 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
  25. Larsson C, Thomsen P, Aronsson BO, et al. 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
  26. Buser D, Weber HP, Bragger U. The treatment of partially edentulous patients with ITI hollow-screw implants; presurgical evaluation and surgical procedures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:165-75.
  27. Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A. Oral implant surfaces: Part 1--review focusing on topographic and chemical properties of different surfaces and in vivo responses to them. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:536-43.
  28. 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 Implants 1997;12:486-94.
  29. 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;15:381-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01082.x
  30. Khang W, Feldman S, Hawley CE, Gunsolley J. A multi-center study comparing dual acid-etched and machined-surfaced implants in various bone qualities. J Periodontol 2001;72: 1384-90. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2001.72.10.1384
  31. Gokcen-Rohlig B, Yaltirik M, Ozer S, Tuncer ED, Evlioglu G. Survival and success of ITI implants and prostheses: retrospective study of cases with 5-year follow-up. Eur J Dent 2009;3:42-9.
  32. Penarrocha M, Guarinos J, Sanchis JM, Balaguer J. A retrospective study (1994-1999) of 441 ITI${\circledR}$ implants in 114 patients followed-up during an average of 2.3 years. Med Oral 2002;7:144-55.
  33. Berglundh T, Persson L, Klinge B. A systematic review of the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported in prospective longitudinal studies of at least 5 years. J Clin Periodontol 2002;29(Suppl 3): 197-212; discussion 232-3. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-051X.29.s3.12.x
  34. Renvert S, Lessem J, Lindahl C, Svensson M. Treatment of incipient peri-implant infections using topical minocycline microspheres versus topical chlorhexidine gel as an adjunct to mechanical debridement. J Int Acad Periodontol 2004;6(4 Suppl):154-9.
  35. Pikos MA. Maxillary sinus membrane repair: report of a technique for large perforations. Implant Dent 1999;8:29-34. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-199901000-00003
  36. Doud Galli SK, Lebowitz RA, Giacchi RJ, Glickman R, Jacobs JB. Chronic sinusitis complicating sinus lift surgery. Am J Rhinol 2001;15:181-6. https://doi.org/10.2500/105065801779954120
  37. van den Bergh JP, ten Bruggenkate CM, Disch FJ, Tuinzing DB. Anatomical aspects of sinus floor elevations. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11:256-65. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011003256.x
  38. Misch CM. The pharmacologic management of maxillary sinus elevation surgery. J Oral Implantol 1992;18:15-23.
  39. Chung DM, Oh TJ, Lee J, Misch CE, Wang HL. Factors affecting late implant bone loss: a retrospective analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;22:117-26.