Repositorio
Institucional

Benalcazar Jalkh, Ernesto B.

Parra, Marcelo

Tovar, Nick

Torroni, Andrea

Badalov, Rafael M.

Bonfante, Estevam A.

Nayak, Vasudev

Castellano, Arthur

Coelho, Paulo G.

Witek, Lukasz

The Influence of Surface Treatment on Osseointegration of Endosteal Implants Presenting Decompressing Vertical Chambers: An In Vivo Study in Sheep

QUINTESSENCE PUBLISHING CO INC

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS

en

Purpose: To qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate histologic osseointegration parameters of implants designed with decompressing vertical chambers between the threads with two different surface treatments (TiO2 blasting + maleic acid vs TiO2 blasting + maleic + HCI) in a large translational animal model at 3 and 6 weeks in vivo. Materials and Methods: Nine female sheep were used, and 72 implants with trapezoidal threads and decompressing vertical chambers of 0.6 mm in diameter and 0.2 mm in depth were placed in the ilium crest. After 3 and 6 weeks, the animals were euthanized, and biomechanical and histomophometric analyses were performed. Results: Survey histologic evaluation indicated intimate contact between the bone and the implants independent of surface treatment at both times in vivo. Bone formation at both time points depicted an intramembranous-type healing pattern between the implant threads. The mean removal torque values for all groups showed a relative increase in removal torque from 3 to 6 weeks. In terms of bone area fraction occupancy analysis, significant differences were found at 6 weeks between surface treatments (P = .046), where the experimental surface yielded higher degrees of bone area fraction occupancy. Conclusion: Conical implants with decompressing vertical chambers between threads presented similar osseointegration parameters regarding bone-to -implant contact and torque-out test values irrespective of surface treatment. However, shifting from a minimally rough to a moderately rough surface (experimental surface with supplemental acid-etching) resulted in significantly improved bone area fraction occupancy at 6 weeks. Intl Oral Maxillofac Implants 2022,37:929-936. doi: 10.11607/jomi.9354

2022

artículo original

10.11607/jomi.9354

PDF

dental implants

macrodesign

osseointegration

surface treatment

Odontología, Cirugía Bucal y Medicina

Odontología, Cirugía y Medicina Oral

implantes dentales

macrodiseño

osteointegración

tratamiento de superficies

929.0

936

artículo original

versión publicada

metadata

metadata

WOS:000898545300010

0882-2786

Odontología, Cirugía Bucal y Medicina