| 1. |
- Coelho, Paulo G., et al.
(författare)
-
Microrobotized blasting improves the bone-to-textured implant response. A preclinical in vivo biomechanical study
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Journal of The Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials. - : Elsevier. - 1751-6161 .- 1878-0180. ; 56, s. 175-182
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This study evaluated the effect of microrobotized blasting of titanium endosteal implants relative to their manually blasted counterparts. Two different implant systems were utilized presenting two different implant surfaces. Control surfaces (Manual) were fabricated by manually grit blasting the implant surfaces while experimental surfaces (Microblasted) were fabricated through a microrobotized system that provided a one pass grit blasting routine. Both surfaces were created with the same similar to 50 gm average particle size alumina powder at similar to 310 KPa. Surfaces were then etched with 37% HCl for 20 min, washed, and packaged through standard industry procedures. The surfaces were characterized through scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and optical interferometry, and were then placed in a beagle dog radius model remaining in vivo for 3 and 6 weeks. The implant removal torque was recorded and statistical analysis evaluated implant system and surface type torque levels as a function of time in vivo. Histologic sections were qualitatively evaluated for tissue response. Electron microscopy depicted textured surfaces for both manual and microblasted surfaces. Optical interferometry showed significantly higher S-a, S-q, values for the microblasted surface and no significant difference for S-ds and S-dr values between surfaces. In vivo results depicted that statistically significant gains in biomechanical fixation were obtained for both implant systems tested at 6 weeks in vivo, while only one system presented significant biomechanical gain at 3 weeks. Histologic sections showed qualitative higher amounts of new bone forming around microblasted implants relative to the manually blasted group. Microrobotized blasting resulted in higher biomechanical fixation of endosteal dental implants and should be considered as an alternative for impant surface manufacturing.
|
|
| 2. |
- Lahens, Bradley, et al.
(författare)
-
Biomechanical and histologic basis of osseodensification drilling for endosteal implant placement in low density bone. An experimental study in sheep
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Journal of The Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials. - : Elsevier. - 1751-6161 .- 1878-0180. ; 63, s. 56-65
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A bone drilling concept, namely osseodensification, has been introduced for the placement of endosteal implants to increase primary stability through densification of the osteotomy walls. This study investigated the effect of osseodensification on the initial stability and early osseointegration of conical and parallel walled endosteal implants in low density bone. Five male sheep were used. Three implants were inserted in the ilium, bilaterally, totaling 30 implants (n=15 conical, and n=15 parallel). Each animal received 3 implants of each type, inserted into bone sites prepared as follows: (i) regular-drilling (R: 2 mm pilot, 3.2 mm, and 3.8 mm twist drills), (ii) clockwise osseodensification (CW), and (iii) counterclockwise (CCW) osseodensification drilling with Densah Bur (Versah, Jackson, MI, USA): 2.0 mm pilot, 2.8 mm, and 3.8 mm multi-fluted burs. Insertion torque as a function of implant type and drilling technique, revealed higher values for osseodensification relative to R-drilling, regardless of implant macrogeometry. A significantly higher bone-to-implant contact (BIC) for both osseodensification techniques (p<0.05) was observed compared to R-drilling. There was no statistical difference in BIC as a function of implant type (p=0.58), nor in bone-area-fraction occupancy (BAFO) as a function of drilling technique (p=0.22), but there were higher levels of BAFO for parallel than conic implants (p=0.001). Six weeks after surgery, new bone formation along with remodeling sites was observed for all groups. Bone chips in proximity with the implants were seldom observed in the R-drilling group, but commonly observed in the CW, and more frequently under the CCW osseodensification technique. In low-density bone, endosteal implants present higher insertion torque levels when placed in osseodensification drilling sites, with no osseointegration impairment compared to standard subtractive drilling methods.
|
|
