截骨准备对即刻加载锥形种植体骨整合的影响

Q1 Medicine Advances in Dental Research Pub Date : 2016-03-01 DOI:10.1177/0022034515624446
Andreas Stavropoulos, David L. Cochran, M. Obrecht, B. Pippenger, Michel Dard
{"title":"截骨准备对即刻加载锥形种植体骨整合的影响","authors":"Andreas Stavropoulos, David L. Cochran, M. Obrecht, B. Pippenger, Michel Dard","doi":"10.1177/0022034515624446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of the present preclinical in vivo study was to evaluate whether a modified “drill-only” protocol, involving slight underpreparation of the implant site, may have an effect on aspects of osseointegration of a novel bone-level tapered implant, compared with the “standard drilling” protocol involving taping and profiling of the marginal aspect of the implant socket. In each side of the edentulated and completely healed mandible of 11 minipigs, 2 tapered implants (8 mm long × 4.1 mm Ø, BLT; Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) were installed either with the drill-only or the standard drilling protocol. Significantly lower average insertion torque values were recorded for the standard drilling protocol group (52 ± 29 Ncm) compared with the drill-only group (70 ± 27 Ncm) (t test, P ≤ 0.05); no significant difference was observed between the 2 groups regarding implant stability, by means of resonance frequency analysis (75 ± 8 vs. 75 ± 6, respectively). Half of the implants were immediately loaded and the rest were submerged, providing observation times of 8 or 4 wk, respectively. Non-decalcified histological and histomorphometric analysis of the implants with surrounding tissues showed no significant differences between the 2 drilling protocols regarding the distance from the implant platform to the first coronal bone-to-implant contact (f-BIC), the total bone-to-implant contact (BIC) as a percentage of the total implant perimeter, and the bone density in an area extending 1 mm laterally from the implant (BATA) within 2 rectangular regions of interest (ROIs) 4 mm in height, representing the coronal (parallel-walled) and apical (tapered) aspect of the implant (ROI 1 and ROI 2, respectively) in non-submerged implants. In general, marginal peri-implant bone levels were at or slightly apical to the implant platform, and large amounts of bone-to-implant contact were observed. In contrast, immediately loaded implants placed with the drill-only protocol showed statistically significantly lower BIC values (66% ± 13.7%) compared with those installed with the standard drilling protocol (74.8% ± 11.2%) (P = 0.018). In addition, although marginal bone levels were in most of the immediately loaded implants at or slightly apical to the implant platform, some of the implants installed with the drill-only protocol showed marginal bone loss and crater formation. Thus, in this model system, even slight underpreparation of the implant socket appeared to compromise osseointegration of immediately loaded bone-level tapered implants.","PeriodicalId":7300,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Dental Research","volume":"28 1","pages":"34 - 41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0022034515624446","citationCount":"26","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of Osteotomy Preparation on Osseointegration of Immediately Loaded, Tapered Dental Implants\",\"authors\":\"Andreas Stavropoulos, David L. Cochran, M. Obrecht, B. Pippenger, Michel Dard\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0022034515624446\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of the present preclinical in vivo study was to evaluate whether a modified “drill-only” protocol, involving slight underpreparation of the implant site, may have an effect on aspects of osseointegration of a novel bone-level tapered implant, compared with the “standard drilling” protocol involving taping and profiling of the marginal aspect of the implant socket. In each side of the edentulated and completely healed mandible of 11 minipigs, 2 tapered implants (8 mm long × 4.1 mm Ø, BLT; Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) were installed either with the drill-only or the standard drilling protocol. Significantly lower average insertion torque values were recorded for the standard drilling protocol group (52 ± 29 Ncm) compared with the drill-only group (70 ± 27 Ncm) (t test, P ≤ 0.05); no significant difference was observed between the 2 groups regarding implant stability, by means of resonance frequency analysis (75 ± 8 vs. 75 ± 6, respectively). Half of the implants were immediately loaded and the rest were submerged, providing observation times of 8 or 4 wk, respectively. Non-decalcified histological and histomorphometric analysis of the implants with surrounding tissues showed no significant differences between the 2 drilling protocols regarding the distance from the implant platform to the first coronal bone-to-implant contact (f-BIC), the total bone-to-implant contact (BIC) as a percentage of the total implant perimeter, and the bone density in an area extending 1 mm laterally from the implant (BATA) within 2 rectangular regions of interest (ROIs) 4 mm in height, representing the coronal (parallel-walled) and apical (tapered) aspect of the implant (ROI 1 and ROI 2, respectively) in non-submerged implants. In general, marginal peri-implant bone levels were at or slightly apical to the implant platform, and large amounts of bone-to-implant contact were observed. In contrast, immediately loaded implants placed with the drill-only protocol showed statistically significantly lower BIC values (66% ± 13.7%) compared with those installed with the standard drilling protocol (74.8% ± 11.2%) (P = 0.018). In addition, although marginal bone levels were in most of the immediately loaded implants at or slightly apical to the implant platform, some of the implants installed with the drill-only protocol showed marginal bone loss and crater formation. Thus, in this model system, even slight underpreparation of the implant socket appeared to compromise osseointegration of immediately loaded bone-level tapered implants.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Dental Research\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"34 - 41\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0022034515624446\",\"citationCount\":\"26\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Dental Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034515624446\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Dental Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034515624446","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 26

摘要

本临床前体内研究的目的是评估改良的“仅钻孔”方案(涉及种植体部位的轻微准备不足)是否可能对新型骨水平锥形种植体的骨整合方面产生影响,而“标准钻孔”方案涉及种植体窝的边缘方面的胶布和轮廓。11头小型猪无牙且完全愈合的下颌骨两侧各2个锥形种植体(8mm长× 4.1 mm Ø, BLT;Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland)安装了纯钻井或标准钻井方案。标准钻孔方案组的平均插入扭矩值(52±29 Ncm)显著低于单纯钻孔组(70±27 Ncm) (t检验,P≤0.05);通过共振频率分析,两组在种植体稳定性方面无显著差异(分别为75±8比75±6)。一半的种植体立即加载,其余的浸泡,分别提供8周或4周的观察时间。种植体与周围组织的非脱钙组织学和组织形态学分析显示,从种植体平台到第一个冠状骨与种植体接触(f-BIC)的距离、总骨与种植体接触(BIC)占种植体总周长的百分比,两种钻孔方案之间没有显著差异。以及2个4毫米高的矩形感兴趣区域(ROI)内从种植体向外侧延伸1mm的区域(BATA)内的骨密度,代表非浸没种植体的冠状面(平行壁)和根尖面(锥形)(分别为ROI 1和ROI 2)。一般来说,种植体周围的边缘骨水平位于种植体平台的顶端或略微顶端,并且观察到大量的骨与种植体接触。相比之下,采用钻孔方案立即加载的种植体的BIC值(66%±13.7%)明显低于采用标准钻孔方案安装的种植体(74.8%±11.2%)(P = 0.018)。此外,尽管大多数即刻加载的种植体的边缘骨水平位于种植体平台的顶端或略微顶端,但一些采用纯钻孔方案安装的种植体出现了边缘骨丢失和凹坑形成。因此,在该模型系统中,即使种植体窝准备不足,也会损害立即加载的骨水平锥形种植体的骨整合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Effect of Osteotomy Preparation on Osseointegration of Immediately Loaded, Tapered Dental Implants
The aim of the present preclinical in vivo study was to evaluate whether a modified “drill-only” protocol, involving slight underpreparation of the implant site, may have an effect on aspects of osseointegration of a novel bone-level tapered implant, compared with the “standard drilling” protocol involving taping and profiling of the marginal aspect of the implant socket. In each side of the edentulated and completely healed mandible of 11 minipigs, 2 tapered implants (8 mm long × 4.1 mm Ø, BLT; Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) were installed either with the drill-only or the standard drilling protocol. Significantly lower average insertion torque values were recorded for the standard drilling protocol group (52 ± 29 Ncm) compared with the drill-only group (70 ± 27 Ncm) (t test, P ≤ 0.05); no significant difference was observed between the 2 groups regarding implant stability, by means of resonance frequency analysis (75 ± 8 vs. 75 ± 6, respectively). Half of the implants were immediately loaded and the rest were submerged, providing observation times of 8 or 4 wk, respectively. Non-decalcified histological and histomorphometric analysis of the implants with surrounding tissues showed no significant differences between the 2 drilling protocols regarding the distance from the implant platform to the first coronal bone-to-implant contact (f-BIC), the total bone-to-implant contact (BIC) as a percentage of the total implant perimeter, and the bone density in an area extending 1 mm laterally from the implant (BATA) within 2 rectangular regions of interest (ROIs) 4 mm in height, representing the coronal (parallel-walled) and apical (tapered) aspect of the implant (ROI 1 and ROI 2, respectively) in non-submerged implants. In general, marginal peri-implant bone levels were at or slightly apical to the implant platform, and large amounts of bone-to-implant contact were observed. In contrast, immediately loaded implants placed with the drill-only protocol showed statistically significantly lower BIC values (66% ± 13.7%) compared with those installed with the standard drilling protocol (74.8% ± 11.2%) (P = 0.018). In addition, although marginal bone levels were in most of the immediately loaded implants at or slightly apical to the implant platform, some of the implants installed with the drill-only protocol showed marginal bone loss and crater formation. Thus, in this model system, even slight underpreparation of the implant socket appeared to compromise osseointegration of immediately loaded bone-level tapered implants.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Advances in Dental Research
Advances in Dental Research Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Women in Dental Clinical and Translational Research. Geroscience: Aging and Oral Health Research. Commentary: Challenges and Opportunities for Women in Dental Research Then and Now—A Look Inside the Lives of 11 Women Presidents of the IADR Women Recipients of IADR Distinguished Scientist Awards
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1