Impact of vertical loading on the implant-bone interface

Pre-Clinical Models in Implant Dentistry: Past, Present, Future

Biomedical research seeks to generate experimental results for translation to clinical settings. In order to improve the transition from bench to bedside, researchers must draw justifiable conclusions based on data from an appropriate model. Animal testing, as a prerequisite to human clinical exposure, is performed in a range of species, from laboratory mice to larger animals (such as dogs or non-human primates). Minipigs appear to be the animal of choice for studying bone surgery around intraoral dental implants. Dog models, well-known in the field of dental implant research, tend now to be used for studies conducted under compromised oral conditions (biofilm). Regarding small animal models, research studies mostly use rodents, with interest in rabbit models declining. Mouse models remain a reference for genetic studies. On the other hand, over the last decade, scientific advances and government guidelines have led to the replacement, reduction, and refinement of the use of all animal models in dental implant research. In new development strategies, some in vivo experiments are being progressively replaced by in vitro or biomaterial approaches. In this review, we summarize the key information on the animal models currently available for dental implant research and highlight (i) the pros and cons of each type, (ii) new levels of decisional procedures regarding study objectives, and (iii) the outlook for animal research, discussing possible non-animal options.

Effect of ultraviolet photofunctionalization of dental titanium implants on osseointegration

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the current study was to evaluate the effect of ultraviolet (UV) photofunctionalization of dental titanium implants with exposure to the oral cavity on osseointegration in an animal model.

METHODS

Forty-eight titanium implants (Camlog^® Conelog^® 4.3 mmx9.0 mm) were placed epicrestally into the edentulous jaws of three minipigs and implant stability was assessed by measuring the implant stability quotient (ISQ). Prior to implantation half of the implants were photofunctionalized with intense UV-light. After three months, the implants were exposed and ISQ was measured again. After six months of implant exposure, the minipigs were sacrificed and the harvested specimens were analyzed using histomorphometric, light, and fluorescence microscopy.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-two of 48 implants osseointegrated. The overall mean bone-implant contact area (BIC) was (64±22)%. No significant differences were found in BIC or ISQ value (multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), P>0.05) between implants with and without exposure to UV photofunctionalization.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant effects were observed on osseointegration of dental titanium implants nine months after exposure of UV photofunctionalization.

Retrievability of implant-supported zirconia restorations cemented on zirconia abutments

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Retrievability of implant-supported restorations is important. Data are lacking for cemented zirconia crowns on zirconia abutments.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the influence of different cements and marginal discrepancy on the retrievability of implant-supported zirconia crowns. Furthermore, the influence of thermocycling on retrievability was evaluated.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty tapered Camlog zirconia abutments (6-degree taper, 6×4.3 mm) were used. Thirty zirconia crowns with 3 different marginal cementation discrepancies (70, 130, 190 μm) were fabricated by using computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) technology. Five cements for interim or semidefinitive cementation were used: eugenol-free zinc oxide (Freegenol) and acrylurethane (ImProv) and 3 different composite resin cements (X-Pand Implant, Dyna Implant, Telio CS Cem Implant). Specimens underwent either 3-day storage in sodium chloride or thermocycling (10 000 cycles). Crowns were removed by using a universal testing machine (UTM) and a clinical removal device. Data were analyzed using 1-way ANOVA and the Scheffé test (α=.05).

RESULTS

Thermocycling decreased the retention force significantly (P<.001). Marginal discrepancy (70 to 190 μm) was not significantly influential on retrievability (P>.05). Therefore, groups were pooled according to the factor of marginal discrepancy. The mean retention force using the UTM after 3-day storage and thermocycling was as follows: Freegenol, 235 ±42 N (thermocycling, 29 ±9 N); Improv, 110 ±50 N (thermocycling, 35 ±38 N); Telio CS, 104 ±17 N (thermocycling, 6 ±10 N); Dyna implant, 61 ±17 N (thermocycling, 1 ±1 N); and X-Pand, 50 ±16 N (thermocycling, 2 ±2 N).

CONCLUSIONS

Retention forces of the tested cements were significantly different and decreased considerably after thermocycling. Marginal cementation discrepancy between 70 and 190 μm did not influence retrievability.

The dynamic interface: A review

The implant-to-tissue interface is an extremely dynamic region of interaction. Generally, a surgical procedure is performed on a patient to insert a foreign material into the bone, and the body is called on to “heal” the wound. The time schedule crucial for a healing process that is expected to result in restitution ad integrum must be determined with respect to the condition of the individual patient and tissue to be treated. There are various factors responsible for the formation of an adequate bone–implant interface. A comprehensive review of the response of bone to implant is described.