» Articles » PMID: 24238310

Dental Implant Macro-Design Features Can Impact the Dynamics of Osseointegration

Overview
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2013 Nov 19
PMID 24238310
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical performance of two dental implant types possessing a different macro-design in the in vivo pig model.

Materials And Methods: Titanium Aadva(TM) implants (GC, Tokyo, Japan) were compared with OsseoSpeed(TM) implants (Astra, Mölndal, Sweden), with the Aadva implant displaying significant larger inter-thread dimensions than the OsseoSpeed implant. Implants were installed in the parietal bone of 12 domestic pigs and left for healing for either 1 or 3 months. Implant osseointegration was evaluated by quantitative histology (bone volume relative to the tissue volume [BV/TV]; bone-to-implant contact [BIC]) for distinct implant regions (collar, body, total implant length) with specific implant thread features. The Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney nonparametric test with α = 0.05 was performed.

Results: An inferior amount of bone enveloping the Aadva implant compared with the OsseoSpeed implant was observed, in particular at the implant body part with its considerable inter-thread gaps (p < .05). Concomitantly, the Aadva macro-design negatively affected the amount of bone in direct contact with the implant for this specific implant part (p < .05), and resulted in an overall impaired implant osseointegration at the initial healing stage (total implant length; 1-month healing; p < .05).

Conclusion: Although the Aadva implant displayed a clinically acceptable level of osseointegration, the findings demonstrate that implant macro-design features can impact the dynamics of implant osseointegration. Consideration of specific implant macro-design features should be made relative to the biological and mechanical microenvironment.

Citing Articles

Tribocorrosion of 3D printed dental implants: An overview.

De Stefano M, Singh K, Raina A, Mohan S, Ul Haq M, Ruggiero A J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2024; 19(3):644-663.

PMID: 38807965 PMC: 11131088. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtumed.2024.05.004.


Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of a Novel Triangular Implant Neck Design: A Case Series.

Collins J, Ogando B, Hong H, Hou W, Romanos G Dent J (Basel). 2022; 10(6).

PMID: 35735655 PMC: 9221962. DOI: 10.3390/dj10060113.


An Osteotomy Tool That Preserves Bone Viability: Evaluation in Preclinical and Clinical Settings.

Bahat O, Yin X, Holst S, Zabalegui I, Berroeta E, Perez J J Clin Med. 2022; 11(9).

PMID: 35566662 PMC: 9103213. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11092536.


Pre-Clinical Models in Implant Dentistry: Past, Present, Future.

Blanc-Sylvestre N, Bouchard P, Chaussain C, Bardet C Biomedicines. 2021; 9(11).

PMID: 34829765 PMC: 8615291. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines9111538.


The effects of metformin on the bone filling ration around of TiAlVa implants in non diabetic rats.

Talo Yildirim T, Dundar S, Bozoglan A, Karaman T, Kahraman O, Ozcan E J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2020; 10(4):474-477.

PMID: 32904211 PMC: 7452287. DOI: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2020.07.012.