대한치과보철학회지 (The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics)

  • 제57권4호
  • /
  • Pages.335-341
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 0301-2875(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-3789(eISSN)
대한치과보철학회 (The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

단일, 이중 산처리 임플란트의 회전제거력 비교

Comparison of removal torque of dual-acid etched and single-acid etched implants in rabbit tibias

  • 김종진 (경북대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 조성암 (경북대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실)
  • Kim, Jong-Jin (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Cho, Sung-Am (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University)
  • 투고 : 2019.05.03
  • 심사 : 2019.08.12
  • 발행 : 2019.10.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

목적:불산과 염산/ 황산을 두 번 사용하는 임플란트 표면처리 방식은 선반가공한 표면에 비하여 강한 결합력을 보이지만 두 번 산처리하는 방식은 티타늄의 피로도를 야기시켜 미소균열을 야기시킬 수 있으므로, 염산으로 한번 산처리하는 방식이 비슷한 결합력을 가진다면 단순하고 효율적인 산처리 방식이 될 수 있다. 재료 및 방법: 9개의 지름 3.75, 길이 4 mm의 두 번 처리 방식의 임플란트와 같은 크기의 한 번 처리 방식의 임플란트를 토끼의 경골에 심어서, 10일 후에 회전제거력, 거칠기, 젖음각도를 측정하였다. 결과: 두 번 처리 방식과 한 번 처리 방식의 회전제거력은 차이가 없었고 (P = .995). 두 번 처리군의 거칠기는 $0.93{\mu}m$, 한 번 처리는 $0.84{\mu}m$이었다 (P = .170). 평균젖음각은 두 번 처리는 $99^{\circ}$, 한 번 처리는 $98^{\circ}$ 이었다 (P = .829). 각 변수 모두 두 그룹의 차이는 없었다. 결론:산으로 한번 처리하거나 두 번 처리 하거나 두 그룹의 회전제거력, 거칠기, 평균젖음각의 차이는 없었기 때문에 종래의 dual acid treatment보다 한번 처리하여도 유용한 것으로 보여진다.

Purpose: Chemically strong-acids (HF and $HCl/H_2SO_4$) dual etching implant surfaces have higher strengths of osseointegration than machined implant surfaces. However, the dual acid treatment deteriorates the physical properties of the titanium by weakening the fatigue resistance of the implant and causing microcracks. The removal torque comparison between the dual-acid etched (hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, HS) and single-acid etched implants (hydrochloric acid, H) could reveal the efficiency of implant surface acid treatment. Materials and methods: Nine $3.75{\times}4mm$ dual-acid etched SLA implants and nine single-acid etched SLA implants were inserted into New Zealand rabbit tibias. After 10 days, removal torque, roughness, and wetting angle were measured. Results: Mean removal torque values were as follows: Mean removal torque were 9.94 Ncm for HS group and 9.96 Ncm for H group (P=.995). Mean surface roughness value were $0.93{\mu}m$ for HS group and $0.84{\mu}m$ for H group (P=.170). Root mean square roughness (RSq) values were $1.21{\mu}m$ for HS group and $1.08{\mu}m$ for H group (P=.294), and mean wetting angle values were $99^{\circ}$ for HS group and $98^{\circ}$ for H group (P=.829). Statistical analysis showed no significant difference between the removal torques, roughness, or wetting angles of the two groups. Conclusion: In this experiment, we found no significant difference in removal torque, roughness, or wetting angle between dual-acid etched and single-acid etched implants.

키워드

참고문헌

  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. van Steenberghe D, Jacobs R, Desnyder M, Maffei G, Quirynen M. The relative impact of local and endogenous patientrelated factors on implant failure up to the abutment stage. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:617-22. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130607.x
  3. Wennerberg A, Hallgren C, Johansson C, Danelli S. A histomorphometric evaluation of screw-shaped implants each prepared with two surface roughnesses. Clin Oral Implants Res 1998;9:11-9. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1998.090102.x
  4. Vervaeke S, Collaert B, De Bruyn H. The effect of implant surface modifications on survival and bone loss of immediately loaded implants in the edentulous mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013;28:1352-7. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3200
  5. Souza FA, Queiroz TP, Guastaldi AC, Garcia-Junior IR, Magro-Filho O, Nishioka RS, Sisti KE, Sonoda CK. Comparative in vivo study of commercially pure Ti implants with surfaces modified by laser with and without silicate deposition: biomechanical and scanning electron microscopy analysis. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2013;101:76-84.
  6. 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
  7. Daculsi G, Laboux O, Malard O, Weiss P. Current state of the art of biphasic calcium phosphate bioceramics. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2003;14:195-200.
  8. Geurs NC, Jeffcoat RL, McGlumphy EA, Reddy MS, Jeffcoat MK. Influence of implant geometry and surface characteristics on progressive osseointegration. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:811-5.
  9. Chang YL, Lew D, Park JB, Keller JC. Biomechanical and morphometric analysis of hydroxyapatite-coated implants with varying crystallinity. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1999;57:1096-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(99)90333-6
  10. Hallgren C, Reimers H, Chakarov D, Gold J, Wennerberg A. An in vivo study of bone response to implants topographically modified by laser micromachining. Biomaterials 2003;24:701-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(02)00266-1
  11. Cho SA, Jung SK. A removal torque of the laser-treated titanium implants in rabbit tibia. Biomaterials 2003;24:4859-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00377-6
  12. Gaggl A, Schultes G, Muller WD, Karcher H. Scanning electron microscopical analysis of laser-treated titanium implant surfaces-a comparative study. Biomaterials 2000;21:1067-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00002-8
  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. Ivanoff CJ, Hallgren C, Widmark G, Sennerby L, Wennerberg A. Histologic evaluation of the bone integration of TiO(2) blasted and turned titanium microimplants in humans. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:128-34. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.012002128.x
  15. Massaro C, Rotolo P, De Riccardis F, Milella E, Napoli A, Wieland M, Textor M, Spencer ND, Brunette DM. Comparative investigation of the surface properties of commercial titanium dental implants. Part I: chemical composition. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2002;13:535-48. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015170625506
  16. Klokkevold PR, Johnson P, Dadgostari S, Caputo A, Davies JE, Nishimura RD. Early endosseous integration enhanced by dual acid etching of titanium: a torque removal study in the rabbit. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:350-7. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.012004350.x
  17. Cho SA, Park KT. The removal torque of titanium screw inserted in rabbit tibia treated by dual acid etching. Biomaterials 2003;24:3611-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00218-7
  18. Trisi P, Marcato C, Todisco M. Bone-to-implant apposition with machined and MTX microtextured implant surfaces in human sinus grafts. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2003;23:427-37.
  19. He FM, Yang GL, Zhao SF, Cheng ZP. Mechanical and histomorphometric evaluations of rough titanium implants treated with hydrofluoric acid/nitric acid solution in rabbit tibia. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011;26:115-22.
  20. Zareidoost A, Yousefpour M, Ghaseme B, Amanzadeh A. The relationship of surface roughness and cell response of chemical surface modification of titanium. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2012;23:1479-88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-012-4611-9
  21. Roccuzzo M, Bunino M, Prioglio F, Bianchi SD. Early loading of sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) implants: a pro spective split-mouth comparative study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:572-8. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.120604.x
  22. Cochran DL, Buser D, ten Bruggenkate CM, Weingart D, Taylor TM, Bernard JP, Peters F, Simpson JP. 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. Park JY, Davies JE. Red blood cell and platelet interactions with titanium implant surfaces. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11:530-9. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011006530.x
  24. Szmukler-Moncler S, Bischof M, Nedir R, Ermrich M. Titanium hydride and hydrogen concentration in acid-etched commercially pure titanium and titanium alloy implants: a comparative analysis of five implant systems. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010;21:944-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01938.x
  25. Yokoyama K, Ichikawa T, Murakami H, Miyamoto Y, Asaoka K. Fracture mechanisms of retrieved titanium screw thread in dental implant. Biomaterials 2002;23:2459-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(01)00380-5
  26. van Kooten TG, Schakenraad JM, van der Mei HC, Busscher HJ. Influence of substratum wettability on the strength of adhesion of human fibroblasts. Biomaterials 1992;13:897-904. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(92)90112-2
  27. Yanagisawa I, Sakuma H, Shimura M, Wakamatsu Y, Yanagisawa S, Sairenji E. Effects of "wettability" of biomaterials on culture cells. J Oral Implantol 1989;15:168-77.
  28. Kilpadi DV, Lemons JE. Surface energy characterization of unalloyed titanium implants. J Biomed Mater Res 1994;28:1419-25. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820281206
  29. Albrektsson T, Branemark PI, Eriksson A, Lindstrom J. The preformed autologous bone graft. An experimental study in the rabbit. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1978;12:215-23. https://doi.org/10.3109/02844317809012997
  30. Carlsson L, Rostlund T, Albrektsson B, Albrektsson T. Removal torques for polished and rough titanium implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988;3:21-4.
  31. Buser D, Nydegger T, Oxland T, Cochran DL, Schenk RK, Hirt HP, Snetivy D, Nolte LP. Interface shear strength of titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a biomechanical study in the maxilla of miniature pigs. J Biomed Mater Res 1999;45:75-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199905)45:2<75::AID-JBM1>3.0.CO;2-P
  32. Roccuzzo M, Wilson T. A prospective study evaluating a protocol for 6 weeks' loading of SLA implants in the posterior maxilla: one year results. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:502-7. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130509.x
  33. Ponsonnet L, Reybier K, Jaffrezic N, Comte V, Lagneau C, Lissac M, Martelet C. Relationship between surface properties (roughness, wettability) of titanium and titanium alloys and cell behaviour. Mater Sci Eng C 2003;23:551-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0928-4931(03)00033-X
  34. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T, Andersson B. Bone tissue response to commercially pure titanium implants blasted with fine and coarse particles of aluminum oxide. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:38-45.
  35. Webb K, Hlady V, Tresco PA. Relative importance of surface wettability and charged functional groups on NIH 3T3 fibroblast attachment, spreading, and cytoskeletal organization. J Biomed Mater Res 1998;41:422-30. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(19980905)41:3<422::AID-JBM12>3.0.CO;2-K
  36. Zhao G, Schwartz Z, Wieland M, Rupp F, Geis-Gerstorfer J, Cochran DL, Boyan BD. High surface energy enhances cell response to titanium substrate microstructure. J Biomed Mater Res A 2005;74:49-58.
  37. Boyan BD, Dean DD, Lohmann CH, Cochran DL, Sylvia VL, Schwartz Z. The titanium-bone cell interface in vitro: The role of the surface in promoting osteointegration. In: Donald MB, Pentti T, Marcus T. ed. Titanium in medicine. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2001. p. 561-85.
  38. Szmukler-Moncler S, Reingewirtz Y, Weber H-P. Bone response to early loading: The effect of surface state. In: Davidovitch Z, Norton LA, eds. Biological mechanisms of tooth movement and craniofacial adaptation. Boston: Harvard Society for the Advancement of Orthodontics, 1996. p. 611-6.
  39. Taborelli M, Jobin M, Francois P, Vaudaux P, Tonetti M, Szmukler-Moncler S, Simpson JP, Descouts P. 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
  40. Donachie Junior MJ. Titanium: A technical guide. 2nd ed. Materials Park: ASM International: 2000. p. 85-94.
  41. Zhang F, Yang GL, He FM, Zhang LJ, Zhao SF. Cell response of titanium implant with a roughened surface containing titanium hydride: an in vitro study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;68:1131-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.12.027