Buccal and lingual bone level alterations after immediate implantation of four implant surfaces: a study in dogs

Dental Implants: Enhancing Biological Response Through Surface Modifications

Surface characteristics are an important factor for long-term clinical success of dental implants. Alterations of implant surface characteristics accelerate or improve osseointegration by interacting with the physiology of bone healing. Dental implant surfaces have been traditionally modified at the microlevel. Recently, researchers have actively investigated nano-modifications in dental implants. This review explores implant surface modifications that enhance biological response at the interface between a bone and the implant.

Three interfaces of the dental implant system and their clinical effects on hard and soft tissues

Anatomically, the human tooth has structures both embedded within and forming part of the exterior surface of the human body. When a tooth is lost, it is often replaced by a dental implant, to facilitate the chewing of food and for esthetic purposes. For successful substitution of the lost tooth, hard tissue should be integrated into the implant surface. The microtopography and chemistry of the implant surface have been explored with the aim of enhancing osseointegration. Additionally, clinical implant success is dependent on ensuring that a barrier, comprising strong gingival attachment to an abutment, does not allow the infiltration of oral bacteria into the bone-integrated surface. Epithelial and connective tissue cells respond to the abutment surface, depending on its surface characteristics and the materials from which it is made. In particular, the biomechanics of the implant-abutment connection structure (i.e., the biomechanics of the interface between implant and abutment surfaces, and the screw mechanics of the implant-abutment assembly) are critical for both the soft tissue seal and hard tissue integration. Herein, we discuss the clinical importance of these three interfaces: bone-implant, gingiva-abutment, and implant-abutment.

Histologic and Histomorphometric Evaluation of a New Bioactive Liquid BBL on Implant Surface: A Preclinical Study in Foxhound Dogs

BACKGROUND

Bioactive chemical surface modifications improve the wettability and osseointegration properties of titanium implants in both animals and humans. The objective of this animal study was to investigate and compare the bioreactivity characteristics of titanium implants (BLT) pre-treated with a novel bone bioactive liquid (BBL) and the commercially available BLT-SLA active.

METHODS

Forty BLT-SLA titanium implants were placed in in four foxhound dogs. Animals were divided into two groups (n = 20): test (BLT-SLA pre-treated with BBL) and control (BLT-SLA active) implants. The implants were inserted in the post extraction sockets. After 8 and 12 weeks, the animals were sacrificed, and mandibles were extracted, containing the implants and the surrounding soft and hard tissues. Bone-to-implant contact (BIC), inter-thread bone area percentage (ITBA), soft tissue, and crestal bone loss were evaluated by histology and histomorphometry.

RESULTS

All animals were healthy with no implant loss or inflammation symptoms. All implants were clinically and histologically osseo-integrated. Relative to control groups, test implants demonstrated a significant 1.5- and 1.7-fold increase in BIC and ITBA values, respectively, at both assessment intervals. Crestal bone loss was also significantly reduced in the test group, as compared with controls, at week 8 in both the buccal crests (0.47 ± 0.32 vs 0.98 ± 0.51 mm, p < 0.05) and lingual crests (0.39* ± 0.3 vs. 0.89 ± 0.41 mm, p < 0.05). At week 12, a pronounced crestal bone loss improvement was observed in the test group (buccal, 0.41 ± 0.29 mm and lingual, 0.54 ± 0.23 mm). Tissue thickness showed comparable values at both the buccal and lingual regions and was significantly improved in the studied groups (0.82-0.92 mm vs. 33-48 mm in the control group).

CONCLUSIONS

Relative to the commercially available BLT-SLA active implants, BLT-SLA pre-treated with BBL showed improved histological and histomorphometric characteristics indicating a reduced titanium surface roughness and improved wettability, promoting healing and soft and hard tissue regeneration at the implant site.

A systematic review on the effect of inorganic surface coatings in large animal models and meta-analysis on tricalcium phosphate and hydroxyapatite on periimplant bone formation

The aim of the present systematic review was to analyse studies using inorganic implant coatings and, in a meta‐analysis, the effect of specifically tricalcium phosphate (TCP) and hydroxyapatite (HA) implant surface coatings on bone formation according to the PRISMA criteria. Inclusion criteria were the comparison to rough surfaced titanium implants in large animal studies at different time points of healing. Forty studies met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. Fifteen of these analyzed the bone‐to‐implant contact (BIC) around the most investigated inorganic titanium implant coatings, namely TCP and HA, and were included in the meta‐analysis. The results of the TCP group show after 14 days a BIC being 3.48% points lower compared with the reference surface. This difference in BIC decreases to 0.85% points after 21–28 days. After 42–84 days, the difference in BIC of 13.79% points is in favor of the TCP‐coatings. However, the results are not statistically significant, in part due to the fact that the variability between the studies increased over time. The results of the HA group show a significant difference in mean BIC of 6.94% points after 14 days in favor of the reference surface. After 21–28 days and 42–84 days the difference in BIC is slightly in favor of the test group with 1.53% points and 1.57% points, respectively, lacking significance. In large animals, there does not seem to be much effect of TCP‐coated or HA‐coated implants over uncoated rough titanium implants in the short term.

Comparison of Osseointegration of Five Different Surfaced Titanium Implants

The topography, chemical features, surface charge, and hydrophilic nature of titanium implant surfaces are crucial factors for successful osseointegration. This study aimed to investigate the bone implant contact (BIC) ratio of titanium dental implants with different surface modification techniques using the rat femoral bone model. Sandblasted and acid washed (SL-AW), sandblasted (SL), resorbable blast material (RBM), microarc (MA), and sandblasted and microarc (SL-MA) surfaces were compared in this study. Forty male Sprague-Dawley rats were used in this study. The rats were divided into 5 equal groups (n = 8), and totally 40 implants were integrated into the right femoral bones of the rats. The rats were sacrificed 12 weeks after the surgical integration of the implants. The implant surface-bone tissue interaction was directly observed by a light microscope, and BIC ratios were measured after the nondecalcified histological procedures. Bone implant contact ratios were determined as follows: SL-AW: 59.26 ± 14.36%, SL: 66.01 ± 9.63%, RBM: 63.53 ± 11.23%, MA: 65.51 ± 10.3%, and SL-MA: 68.62 ± 6.6%. No statistically significant differences were found among the 5 different surfaced titanium implant groups (P > 0.05). Our results show that various implant surface modification techniques can provide favorable bone responses to the BIC of dental implants.

In Vivo Evaluation of Dual Acid-Etched and Grit-Blasted/Acid-Etched Implants With Identical Macrogeometry in High-Density Bone

PURPOSE

Based on the current evidence, the effect of implant macrogeometry has a significant influence on osseointegration. Thus, this study evaluated histomorphometrically and histologically the bone response to acid-etched in comparison to grit-blasted/acid-etched (GB) and machined control (C) surfaced implants possessing identical macrogeometry placed in high-density bone.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Implant surface topography of the 3 different surfaced implants has previously been characterized. The macrogeometry of the implants were conical, and healing chambers were created in the cortical regions. The 3 groups were placed in the external mandibular body of adult male sheep (n = 5). After 6 weeks in vivo, all samples were retrieved for histologic observation and histomorphometry (eg, bone-to-implant contact [BIC] and bone area fraction occupancy [BAFO]).

RESULTS

No statistical difference was observed for BIC and for BAFO, although there was a tendency that the mean values for BAFO was higher for the textured surface groups.

CONCLUSIONS

It is suggested that the effect of surface topography is minimal in high-density bone and osseointegration seemed to be macrogeometry dependent.

Can Time of Implant Placement influence Bone Remodeling?

Since the alveolar process is tissue "dental dependent," after the extraction of the dental element, this process suffers some degree of atrophy during the healing process, which can be reduced with the installation of immediate implants, aiming to maintain the original bone architecture. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of the time of implant placement on bone formation around them. Seven dogs were selected and randomly divided into two groups: Group 1, where implants were placed immediately after extraction of two lower premolars without flap elevation, and group 2, where implants were delayed by 4 months after extractions. Each group received 14 implants, and 4 months after the second surgery, the samples were processed and analyzed histomorphometrically. A mean average analysis and the Kruskal-Wallis test (p < 0.05) were performed. The buccal bone-implant contact (BIC) mean average was found larger in immediate implants (42.61%) compared with delayed implants (37.69%). Group 1 had statistically higher outcomes in bone formation and BIC on the buccal bone wall. It was concluded that performing immediate implants with the palatal approach technique and leaving a buccal GAP enables a higher or at least equal rate to BIC and bone area around them, when compared with delayed implants. Actually, the patients and dentists want to do a shorter treatment with satisfactory results, but it is necessary to understand whether different times of implant placement can influence the results and longevity of the treatment.

Osseointegration: hierarchical designing encompassing the macrometer, micrometer, and nanometer length scales

OBJECTIVE

Osseointegration has been a proven concept in implant dentistry and orthopedics for decades. Substantial efforts for engineering implants for reduced treatment time frames have focused on micrometer and most recently on nanometer length scale alterations with negligible attention devoted to the effect of both macrometer design alterations and surgical instrumentation on osseointegration. This manuscript revisits osseointegration addressing the individual and combined role of alterations on the macrometer, micrometer, and nanometer length scales on the basis of cell culture, preclinical in vivo studies, and clinical evidence.

METHODS

A critical appraisal of the literature was performed regarding the impact of dental implant designing on osseointegration. Results from studies with different methodological approaches and the commonly observed inconsistencies are discussed.

RESULTS

It is a consensus that implant surface topographical and chemical alterations can hasten osseointegration. However, the tailored combination between multiple length scale design parameters that provides maximal host response is yet to be determined.

SIGNIFICANCE

In spite of the overabundant literature on osseointegration, a proportional inconsistency in findings hitherto encountered warrants a call for appropriate multivariable study designing to ensure that adequate data collection will enable osseointegration maximization and/or optimization, which will possibly lead to the engineering of endosteal implant designs that can be immediately placed/loaded regardless of patient dependent conditions.

Reality of dental implant surface modification: a short literature review

Screw-shaped endosseous implants that have a turned surface of commercially pure titanium have a disadvantage of requiring a long time for osseointegration while those implants have shown long-term clinical success in single and multiple restorations. Titanium implant surfaces have been modified in various ways to improve biocompatibility and accelerate osseointegration, which results in a shorter edentulous period for a patient. This article reviewed some important modified titanium surfaces, exploring the in vitro, in vivo and clinical results that numerous comparison studies reported. Several methods are widely used to modify the topography or chemistry of titanium surface, including blasting, acid etching, anodic oxidation, fluoride treatment, and calcium phosphate coating. Such modified surfaces demonstrate faster and stronger osseointegration than the turned commercially pure titanium surface. However, there have been many studies finding no significant differences in in vivo bone responses among the modified surfaces. Considering those in vivo results, physical properties like roughening by sandblasting and acid etching may be major contributors to favorable bone response in biological environments over chemical properties obtained from various modifications including fluoride treatment and calcium phosphate application. Recently, hydrophilic properties added to the roughened surfaces or some osteogenic peptides coated on the surfaces have shown higher biocompatibility and have induced faster osseointegration, compared to the existing modified surfaces. However, the long-term clinical studies about those innovative surfaces are still lacking.

Effect of Platform Shift on Crestal Bone Levels and Mucosal Profile Following Flap Surgery and Subcrestal Implant Placement in Presence/Absence of Gap Defects

BACKGROUND

Physiologic remodeling resulting in crestal bone loss appears a common corollary to dental implant surgery. Several hypotheses and clinical strategies have been advanced to explain and avert crestal remodeling; however, causative mechanisms remain unclear and the efficacy of clinical protocols uncertain.

PURPOSE

The objective of the present study was to provide a histologic account of crestal bone levels and mucosal profile at implant sites receiving platform shift/switch and standard abutments following conventional flap surgery and subcrestal implant placement in presence or absence of crestal gap defects using a dog model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four dental implants were placed into the left/right edentulated posterior mandible in five adult male Hound Labrador mongrel dogs using flap surgery including subcrestal placement with/without a 1 × 5 mm (width × depth) gap defect, and using platform shift/switch and standard abutments. Block biopsies were collected for histological/histometric analysis following an 8-week healing interval.

RESULTS

No significant differences in crestal resorption were observed among experimental groups; crestal resorption being significantly more advanced at buccal than at lingual sites (p < .001). Similarly, crestal bone-implant contact was not significantly different among groups; crestal bone-implant contact being consistently below the implant platform at buccal sites (p < .01). Moreover, the peri-implant mucosal profile was not statistically different among groups, the mucosal height being significantly greater at buccal than at lingual sites (p < .001). Also, no significant differences among groups were observed for the apical extension of the epithelial attachment, the epithelial attachment being arrested more than 2 mm above the implant platform at both platform shift/switch and standard abutments.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a clinical strategy including flap surgery and subcrestal implant placement, implant technology comparing platform shift/switch with standard abutments, surgical approach, and abutment selection seems to have a limited impact on crestal remodeling, associated bone loss, and mucosal profile.

Effect of Platform Shift/Switch and Concave Abutments on Crestal Bone Levels and Mucosal Profile following Flap and Flapless Implant Surgery

BACKGROUND

Crestal remodeling/bone loss appears to be a common sequel to dental implant placement. Several hypotheses/clinical strategies have been proposed to explain/avert crestal remodeling; however, causative mechanisms remain unclear and the efficacy of these clinical approaches uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the present study was to provide a histological account of crestal bone levels and mucosal profile at platform shift/switch and concave abutments following flapless and conventional flap surgery and subcrestal implant placement using a dog model.

METHODS

Four dental implants each were placed in the left/right mandibular posterior jaw quadrants in five adult male Hound/Labrador mongrel dogs using flap surgery with a 1 × 5 mm gap defect or using a flapless approach, both involving placement 2 mm subcrestally and platform shift/switch versus concave abutments. Block biopsies for histological/histometric analysis were collected at 8 weeks.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed regarding crestal bone levels, with all groups showing mean bone levels above the implant platform. Similarly, crestal bone-implant contact was not significantly different among groups. Moreover, peri-implant mucosal profiles were not statistically different among groups for buccal sites; average mucosal height reached 4.1 to 4.9 mm above the implant platform. Comparison between buccal and lingual sites showed a nonsignificant tendency toward greater crestal resorption at buccal sites, adjusting for other factors. Mean crestal bone-implant contact level approximated the implant platform for lingual sites while consistently remaining below the platform at the buccal sites. Peri-implant mucosal height was significantly higher at buccal than at lingual sites, with the epithelial attachment located a significant distance away from the implant platform at buccal sites.

CONCLUSIONS

The surgical approaches (subcrestal implant placement by flap surgery or a flapless approach) and abutment designs (platform shift/switch or concave) used in this study seem to have a limited impact on crestal remodeling, associated bone loss, and mucosal profile. Bioclinical strategies should be developed to circumvent the limitations of current clinical protocol.