Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2010.48.2.122

Histomorphometric study of machined titanium implants and calcium phosphate coated titanium implants  

Kang, Hyun-Joo (Department of Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
Yang, Jae-Ho (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
Publication Information
The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics / v.48, no.2, 2010 , pp. 122-127 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of calcium phosphate coated titanium implant surface on bone response and implant stability at early stage of healing period of 3 weeks and later healing period of 6 weeks. Material and methods: A total of 24 machined, screw-shaped implants (Dentium Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea) which dimensions were 3.3 mm in diameter and 5.0 mm in length, were used in this research. All implants (n = 24), made of commercially pure (grade IV) titanium, were divided into 2 groups. Twelve implants (n = 12) were machined without any surface modification (control). The test implants (n = 12) were anodized and coated with thin film (150nm) of calcium phosphate by electron-beam deposition. The implants were placed on the proximal surface of the rabbit tibiae. The bone to implant contact (BIC) ratios was evaluated after 3 and 6 weeks of implant insertion. Results: The BIC percentage of calcium phosphate coated implants ($70.8{\pm}18.9%$) was significantly higher than that of machined implants ($44.1{\pm}16.5%$) 3 weeks after implant insertion (P = 0.0264). However, there was no significant difference between the groups after 6 weeks of healing (P > .05). Conclusion: The histomorphometric evaluation of implant surface revealed that; 1. After 3 weeks early healing period, bone to implant contact (BIC) percentage of calcium phosphate coated implants (70.8%) was much greater than that of surface untreated machined implants (44.1%) with P = 0.0264. 2. After 6 weeks healing period, however, BIC percentage of calcium phosphate coated implants group (79.0%) was similar to the machined only implant group (78.6%). There was no statistical difference between two groups (P = 0.8074). 3. We found the significant deference between the control group and experimental group during the early healing period of 3 weeks. But no statistical difference was found between two groups during the later of 6 weeks.
Keywords
Machined surface implant; Calcium phosphate coated implant; Electron-beam deposition; Histomorphometry;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 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.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Roberts WE, Smith RK, Zilberman Y, Mozsary PG, Smith RS. Osseous adaptation to continuous loading of rigid endosseous implants. Am J Orthod 1984;86:95-111.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Al-Nawas B, Groetz KA, Goetz H, Duschner H, Wagner W. Comparative histomorphometry and resonance frequency analysis of implants with moderately rough surfaces in a loaded animal model. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:1-8.
4 Albrektsson T, Jacobsson M. Bone-metal interface in osseointegration. J Prosthet Dent 1987;57:597-607.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Lee EJ, Lee SH, Kim HW, Kong YM, Kim HE. Fluoridated apatite coatings on titanium obtained by electron-beam deposition. Biomaterials 2005;26:3843-51.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Lee JJ, Rouhfar L, Beirne OR. Survival of hydroxyapatite-coated implants: a meta-analytic review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000;58:1372-9.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 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.   DOI
8 Wagner WC. A Brief Introduction to advanced surface modification technologies. J Oral Implantol 1992;18:231-5.
9 $Barr\`{e}re$ F, van der Valk CM, Meijer G, Dalmeijer RA, de Groot K, Layrolle P. Osteointegration of biomimetic apatite coating applied onto dense and porous metal implants in femurs of goats. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2003:67:655-65.
10 Vanzillotta PS, Sader MS, Bastos IN, Soares Gde A. Improvement of in vitro titanium bioactivity by three different surface treatments. Dent Mater 2006;22:275-82.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Davies JE. Understanding peri-implant endosseous healing. J Dent Educ 2003;67:932-49.
12 Eisenbarth E, Velten D, Schenk-Meuser K, Linez P, Biehl V, Duschner H, Breme J, Hildebrand H. Interactions between cells and titanium surfaces. Biomol Eng 2002;19:243-9.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Albrektsson T, Sennerby L, Wennerberg A. State of the art of oral implants. Periodontol 2000 2008;47:15-26.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Wennerberg A, Albreksson 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.
15 Le Gu'ehennec L, Soueidan A, Layrolle P, Amouriq Y. Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration. Dent Mater 2007;23:844-54.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 $Br{\aa}anemark$ PI, Breine U, Adell R, Hansson BO, Lindstrom J, Ohlsson A. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1969;3:81-100.   DOI
17 Albrektsson T, $Br{\aa}anemark$ 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.   DOI
18 Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T, Ulrich H, Krol JJ. An optical three-dimensional technique for topographical descriptions of surgical implants. J Biomed Eng 1992;14:412-8.   DOI   ScienceOn