Background: Many chemical and physical modifications of titanium surfaces were introduced, aiming at improving surface bioactivity, but few comparative evidence exists. Objective: To evaluate histologically in minipigs the osseointegration of implants made of commercially pure (CP) titanium or titanium alloy, treated by different roughening procedures. Material and Methods: Three sandblasted acid-etched (SA) surfaces, 2 anodized (AN), and 1 double acid-etched (DAE) were compared. Surface microtopography was characterized with scanning electron microscope; surface element composition was also assessed. One implant per group was inserted in each proximal tibia of 2 minipigs. Three months after healing, block biopsies were taken for histomorphometric analysis. Implant stability quotient (ISQ) was measured at insertion and before harvesting. Results: The highest amount of cortical bone-implant contact was observed around SA implants and showed positive correlation with surface roughness. The greatest increase in ISQ was observed in CP-AN implants. In the medullary region, SA implants showed the best osteogenic response, whereas inflammatory cells were found around DAE and alloy-AN implants. Conclusions: SA surfaces were more osteogenic than anodized or dual acid-etched ones, although not significantly. Surface roughness affected osseointegration.

Osseointegration of Titanium Implants with Different Rough Surfaces : a Histologic and Histomorphometric Study in an Adult Minipig Model / M. Del Fabbro, S. Taschieri, E. Canciani, A. Addis, F. Musto, R. Weinstein, C. Dellavia, M. Del Fabbro. - In: IMPLANT DENTISTRY. - ISSN 1056-6163. - 26:3(2017), pp. 357-366. [10.1097/ID.0000000000000560]

Osseointegration of Titanium Implants with Different Rough Surfaces : a Histologic and Histomorphometric Study in an Adult Minipig Model

M. Del Fabbro
Primo
;
S. Taschieri
Secondo
;
E. Canciani;F. Musto;R. Weinstein
Penultimo
;
C. Dellavia
Ultimo
;
2017

Abstract

Background: Many chemical and physical modifications of titanium surfaces were introduced, aiming at improving surface bioactivity, but few comparative evidence exists. Objective: To evaluate histologically in minipigs the osseointegration of implants made of commercially pure (CP) titanium or titanium alloy, treated by different roughening procedures. Material and Methods: Three sandblasted acid-etched (SA) surfaces, 2 anodized (AN), and 1 double acid-etched (DAE) were compared. Surface microtopography was characterized with scanning electron microscope; surface element composition was also assessed. One implant per group was inserted in each proximal tibia of 2 minipigs. Three months after healing, block biopsies were taken for histomorphometric analysis. Implant stability quotient (ISQ) was measured at insertion and before harvesting. Results: The highest amount of cortical bone-implant contact was observed around SA implants and showed positive correlation with surface roughness. The greatest increase in ISQ was observed in CP-AN implants. In the medullary region, SA implants showed the best osteogenic response, whereas inflammatory cells were found around DAE and alloy-AN implants. Conclusions: SA surfaces were more osteogenic than anodized or dual acid-etched ones, although not significantly. Surface roughness affected osseointegration.
bone healing; dental implants; implant surface; animal model; oral Surgery
Settore BIO/16 - Anatomia Umana
Settore MED/28 - Malattie Odontostomatologiche
2017
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
BIC surfaces minipig 2017.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 813.87 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
813.87 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/517884
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 9
  • Scopus 37
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 35
social impact