TY - JOUR
T1 - Bone reactions adjacent to titanium implants with different surface characteristics subjected to static load. A study in the dog (II)
AU - Gotfredsen, K
AU - Berglundh, T
AU - Lindhe, J
N1 - Keywords: Alveolar Process; Animals; Bicuspid; Biopsy; Bone Density; Coated Materials, Biocompatible; Crowns; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dogs; Fluorescent Dyes; Follow-Up Studies; Mandible; Osseointegration; Stress, Mechanical; Surface Properties; Titanium
PY - 2001
Y1 - 2001
N2 - The purpose of the present study was to compare bone reactions adjacent to titanium implants with either a titanium plasma-sprayed (TPS) or a machined surface subjected to lateral static loading induced by an expansion force. In 3 labrador dogs, the 2nd, 3rd and 4th mandibular premolars were extracted bilaterally. 12 weeks later, 2 implants with a TPS surface were placed in one side and 2 implants with a machined surface were placed in the contralateral side. Twelve weeks after implant installation, crowns, connected in pairs with orthodontic expansion screws, were fitted to the implants and a 0.6 mm wide expansion was initiated. Clinical registrations, standardized radiographs and fluorochrome labeling were carried out during a 24-week period of loading. Biopsies with the implants in situ were harvested and processed for ground sectioning. The sections were subjected to histologic and histometric examination. A higher marginal bone level was observed around implants with a TPS surface compared to machined implants. Furthermore, the values describing the amount of bone-to-implant contact at the bone/implant interface as well as the density of the peri-implant bone were lower at the machined than at the TPS implants.
AB - The purpose of the present study was to compare bone reactions adjacent to titanium implants with either a titanium plasma-sprayed (TPS) or a machined surface subjected to lateral static loading induced by an expansion force. In 3 labrador dogs, the 2nd, 3rd and 4th mandibular premolars were extracted bilaterally. 12 weeks later, 2 implants with a TPS surface were placed in one side and 2 implants with a machined surface were placed in the contralateral side. Twelve weeks after implant installation, crowns, connected in pairs with orthodontic expansion screws, were fitted to the implants and a 0.6 mm wide expansion was initiated. Clinical registrations, standardized radiographs and fluorochrome labeling were carried out during a 24-week period of loading. Biopsies with the implants in situ were harvested and processed for ground sectioning. The sections were subjected to histologic and histometric examination. A higher marginal bone level was observed around implants with a TPS surface compared to machined implants. Furthermore, the values describing the amount of bone-to-implant contact at the bone/implant interface as well as the density of the peri-implant bone were lower at the machined than at the TPS implants.
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 11359475
SN - 0905-7161
VL - 12
SP - 196
EP - 201
JO - Clinical Oral Implants Research
JF - Clinical Oral Implants Research
IS - 3
ER -