Osseointegration of implants with dendrimers surface characteristics installed conventionally or with Piezosurgery®. A comparative study in the dog
- PMID: 23231427
- DOI: 10.1111/clr.12082
Osseointegration of implants with dendrimers surface characteristics installed conventionally or with Piezosurgery®. A comparative study in the dog
Abstract
Aim: The first aim of the present experiment was to compare bone healing at implants installed in recipient sites prepared with conventional drills or a piezoelectric device. The second aim was to compare implant osseointegration onto surfaces with and without dendrimers coatings.
Material and methods: Six Beagles dogs were used in this study. Five implants with two different surfaces, three with a ZirTi(®) surface (zirconia sand blasted, acid etched), and two with a ZirTi(®)-modified surface with dendrimers of phosphoserine and polylysine were installed in the right side of the mandible. In the most anterior region (P2, P3), two recipient sites were prepared with drills, and one implant ZirTi(®) surface and one coated with dendrimers implants were installed at random. In the posterior region (P4 and M1), three recipient sites were randomly prepared: two sites with a Piezosurgery(®) instrument and one site with drill and two ZirTi(®) surface and one coated with dendrimers implants installed. Three months after the surgery, the animals were sacrificed for histological analysis.
Results: No complications occurred during the healing period. Three implants were found not integrated and were excluded from analysis. However, n = 6 was obtained. The distance IS-B at the buccal aspect was 2.2 ± 0.8 and 1.8 ± 0.5 mm, while IS-C was 1.5 ± 0.9 and 1.4 ± 0.6 mm at the Piezosurgery(®) and drill groups, respectively. Similar values were obtained between the dendrimers-coated and ZirTi(®) surface implants. The BIC% values were higher at the drill (72%) compared to the Piezosurgery(®) (67%) sites. The BIC% were also found to be higher at the ZirTi(®) (74%) compared to the dendrimers-coated (65%) implants, the difference being statistically significant.
Conclusion: This study has revealed that oral implants may osseointegrate equally well irrespective of whether their bed was prepared utilizing conventional drills with abundant cooling or Piezosurgery(®). Moreover, the surface coating of implants with dendrimers phosphoserine and polylysine did not improve osseointegration.
Keywords: Piezosurgery®; animal study; bone healing; dendrimers coating; histology; implant dentistry; osseointegration; surface characteristics.
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.
Similar articles
-
Healing at implants installed in osteotomies prepared either with a piezoelectric device or drills: an experimental study in dogs.Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021 Mar;25(1):65-73. doi: 10.1007/s10006-020-00895-y. Epub 2020 Aug 15. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021. PMID: 32803459
-
Bone healing at implants with different surface configurations: an experimental study in dogs.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016 Feb;27(2):196-202. doi: 10.1111/clr.12562. Epub 2015 Feb 6. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016. PMID: 25655747
-
In vivo evaluation of biofunctionalized implant surfaces with a synthetic peptide (P-15) and its impact on osseointegration. A preclinical animal study.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016 Nov;27(11):1339-1348. doi: 10.1111/clr.12723. Epub 2015 Nov 14. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016. PMID: 26567087 Clinical Trial.
-
The Effect of Gold Nanoparticle-Coated Dental Implants on Osseointegration - A Systematic Review.Indian J Dent Res. 2024 Apr 1;35(2):232-238. doi: 10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_761_23. Epub 2024 Sep 14. Indian J Dent Res. 2024. PMID: 39282790
-
Significance of osteogenic surface coatings on implants to enhance osseointegration under osteoporotic-like conditions.Implant Dent. 2014 Dec;23(6):679-86. doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000161. Implant Dent. 2014. PMID: 25290281 Review.
Cited by
-
Stability and marginal bone loss in implants placed using piezoelectric osteotomy versus conventional drilling: systematic review and meta-analysis.Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2021 Mar 1;26(2):e226-e237. doi: 10.4317/medoral.24146. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2021. PMID: 33247573 Free PMC article.
-
Healing at implants installed in osteotomies prepared either with a piezoelectric device or drills: an experimental study in dogs.Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021 Mar;25(1):65-73. doi: 10.1007/s10006-020-00895-y. Epub 2020 Aug 15. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021. PMID: 32803459
-
Comparison of heat production and bone architecture changes in the implant site preparation with compressive osteotomes, osseodensification technique, piezoelectric devices, and standard drills: an ex vivo study on porcine ribs.Odontology. 2023 Jan;111(1):142-153. doi: 10.1007/s10266-022-00730-8. Epub 2022 Jul 19. Odontology. 2023. PMID: 35852778 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of implant site preparation with piezosurgery versus conventional drills in terms of operation time, implant stability and bone density (randomized controlled clinical trial- split mouth design).BMC Oral Health. 2022 Dec 3;22(1):567. doi: 10.1186/s12903-022-02613-4. BMC Oral Health. 2022. PMID: 36463145 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Effect of Rough Surface Platforms on the Mucosal Attachment and the Marginal Bone Loss of Implants: A Dog Study.Materials (Basel). 2020 Feb 10;13(3):802. doi: 10.3390/ma13030802. Materials (Basel). 2020. PMID: 32050603 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical