Osseointegration of a New, Ultrahydrophilic and Nanostructured Dental Implant Surface: A Comparative In Vivo Study

This study compared the osseointegration of acid-etched, ultrahydrophilic, micro- and nanostructured implant surfaces (ANU) with non-ultra-hydrophilic, microstructured (SA) and non-ultrahydrophilic, micro- and nanostructured implant surfaces (AN) in vivo. Fifty-four implants ( = 18 per group) were b...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Biomedicines 2022-04, Vol.10 (5), p.943
Hauptverfasser: Pabst, Andreas, Asran, Ashraf, Lüers, Steffen, Laub, Markus, Holfeld, Christopher, Palarie, Victor, Thiem, Daniel G E, Becker, Philipp, Hartmann, Amely, Heimes, Diana, Al-Nawas, Bilal, Kämmerer, Peer W
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This study compared the osseointegration of acid-etched, ultrahydrophilic, micro- and nanostructured implant surfaces (ANU) with non-ultra-hydrophilic, microstructured (SA) and non-ultrahydrophilic, micro- and nanostructured implant surfaces (AN) in vivo. Fifty-four implants ( = 18 per group) were bilaterally inserted into the proximal tibia of New Zealand rabbits ( = 27). After 1, 2, and 4 weeks, bone-implant contact (BIC, %) in the cortical (cBIC) and spongious bone (sBIC), bone chamber ingrowth (BChI, %), and the supra-crestal, subperiosteal amount of newly formed bone, called percentage of linear bone fill (PLF, %), were analyzed. After one week, cBIC was significantly higher for AN and ANU when compared to SA ( = 0.01 and = 0.005). PLF was significantly increased for ANU when compared to AN and SA ( = 0.022 and = 0.025). After 2 weeks, cBIC was significantly higher in SA when compared to AN ( = 0.039) and after 4 weeks, no significant differences in any of the measured parameters were found anymore. Ultrahydrophilic implants initially improved osseointegration when compared to their non-ultrahydrophilic counterparts. In accordance, ultrahydrophilic implants might be appropriate in cases with a necessity for an accelerated and improved osseointegration, such as in critical size alveolar defects or an affected bone turnover.
ISSN:2227-9059
2227-9059
DOI:10.3390/biomedicines10050943