Study of the osseointegration of dental implants placed with an adapted surgical technique
Objective: To study the osseointegration of dental implants placed with a modified surgical technique in Beagle dogs and to compare it with the conventional method. Materials and methods: Dental implants were placed bilaterally in the mandible of Beagle dogs using the press‐fit as well as undersized...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical oral implants research 2011-07, Vol.22 (7), p.753-759 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 759 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 7 |
| container_start_page | 753 |
| container_title | Clinical oral implants research |
| container_volume | 22 |
| creator | Al-Marshood, Maysa M. Junker, Rudiger Al-Rasheed, Abdulaziz Al Farraj Aldosari, Abdullah Jansen, John A. Anil, Sukumaran |
| description | Objective: To study the osseointegration of dental implants placed with a modified surgical technique in Beagle dogs and to compare it with the conventional method.
Materials and methods: Dental implants were placed bilaterally in the mandible of Beagle dogs using the press‐fit as well as undersized implant bed preparation technique. Micro computer tomography (micro‐CT) and histometric methods were used to analyze the bone implant contact and bone volume (BV) around the implants.
Results: The bone‐to‐implant contact percentage (BIC: expressed as %), first BIC (1st BIC: expressed in mm), sulcus depth (SD: expressed in mm) and connective tissue thickness (CT: expressed in mm) were analyzed for both groups. The BIC percentage was significantly higher for the undersized installed implants (P=0.0118). Also, a significant difference existed between the undersized and press‐fit installed implants for the first screw thread showing bone contact (P=0.0145). There were no significant differences in mucosal response (SD and CT) for both installation procedures. Also, no significant difference was found in the BV, as measured using micro‐CT, between the implants placed with an undersized technique (59.3±4.6) compared with the press‐fit implants (56.6±4.3).
Conclusion: From the observations of the study, it can be concluded that an undersized implant bed can enhance the implant–bone response.
To cite this article:
Al‐Marshood MM, Junker R, Al‐Rasheed A, Al Farraj Aldosari A, Jansen JA, Anil S. Study of the osseointegration of dental implants placed with an adapted surgical technique
Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 22, 2011; 753–759
doi: 10.1111/j.1600‐0501.2010.02055.x |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02055.x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_883041766</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>871965932</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4665-fdf83442ed56c406d455173f2b4c978431c0ed69c25d61e31b4aa08f161353843</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNUU1vEzEQtRCIhsJfQCtx4LRh_Ln2gQNNoSBFIKCoEhfLsb2Nw2Y32F41-fd4ScmBC_gy9sx782b8EKowzHE5rzZzLABq4IDnBEoWCHA-3z9As1PhIZqBAl43WOAz9CSlDQAIJdVjdEYwVlIqNkPfv-bRHaqhrfLaV0NKfgh99rfR5DD0U975PpuuCttdZ_qcqhKsd9VdyOvK9JVxZpfLO43xNtgCzN6u-_Bz9E_Ro9Z0yT-7j-fo27u314v39fLT1YfFm2VtmRC8bl0rKWPEOy4sA-EY57ihLVkxqxrJKLbgnVCWcCewp3jFjAHZlrUop6V-jl4e--7iUGRT1tuQrO_KuH4Yk5aSAsONEP9GNlgJrigpyBd_ITfDGPuyhiZAFS6DN5OyPKJsLD8Xfat3MWxNPGgMejJKb_Tkh5780JNR-rdRel-oz-8FxtXWuxPxjzMF8PoIuAudP_x3Y71YfpluhV8f-SFlvz_xTfyhRUMbrm8-XukbeXF5Sa4v9Gf6C7J-ruQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2039166574</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Study of the osseointegration of dental implants placed with an adapted surgical technique</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Al-Marshood, Maysa M. ; Junker, Rudiger ; Al-Rasheed, Abdulaziz ; Al Farraj Aldosari, Abdullah ; Jansen, John A. ; Anil, Sukumaran</creator><creatorcontrib>Al-Marshood, Maysa M. ; Junker, Rudiger ; Al-Rasheed, Abdulaziz ; Al Farraj Aldosari, Abdullah ; Jansen, John A. ; Anil, Sukumaran</creatorcontrib><description>Objective: To study the osseointegration of dental implants placed with a modified surgical technique in Beagle dogs and to compare it with the conventional method.
Materials and methods: Dental implants were placed bilaterally in the mandible of Beagle dogs using the press‐fit as well as undersized implant bed preparation technique. Micro computer tomography (micro‐CT) and histometric methods were used to analyze the bone implant contact and bone volume (BV) around the implants.
Results: The bone‐to‐implant contact percentage (BIC: expressed as %), first BIC (1st BIC: expressed in mm), sulcus depth (SD: expressed in mm) and connective tissue thickness (CT: expressed in mm) were analyzed for both groups. The BIC percentage was significantly higher for the undersized installed implants (P=0.0118). Also, a significant difference existed between the undersized and press‐fit installed implants for the first screw thread showing bone contact (P=0.0145). There were no significant differences in mucosal response (SD and CT) for both installation procedures. Also, no significant difference was found in the BV, as measured using micro‐CT, between the implants placed with an undersized technique (59.3±4.6) compared with the press‐fit implants (56.6±4.3).
Conclusion: From the observations of the study, it can be concluded that an undersized implant bed can enhance the implant–bone response.
To cite this article:
Al‐Marshood MM, Junker R, Al‐Rasheed A, Al Farraj Aldosari A, Jansen JA, Anil S. Study of the osseointegration of dental implants placed with an adapted surgical technique
Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 22, 2011; 753–759
doi: 10.1111/j.1600‐0501.2010.02055.x</description><identifier>ISSN: 0905-7161</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1600-0501</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02055.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21198894</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Animals ; Bone implants ; bone integration ; Bone-implant interfaces ; Computed tomography ; Connective Tissue - physiology ; Connective tissues ; Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods ; Dental Implants ; Dental materials ; Dental prosthetics ; Dental restorative materials ; Dentistry ; Dogs ; Implants, Experimental ; Installation procedures ; Instrumentation industry ; Mandible ; Mandible - diagnostic imaging ; Mandible - surgery ; Mucosa ; Osseointegration ; Osseointegration - physiology ; primary stability ; Screw threads ; Surface Properties ; Surgery ; Surgical implants ; surgical technique ; Surgical techniques ; Transplants & implants ; X-Ray Microtomography</subject><ispartof>Clinical oral implants research, 2011-07, Vol.22 (7), p.753-759</ispartof><rights>2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S</rights><rights>2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S.</rights><rights>Copyright Wiley Subscription Services, Inc. Jul 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4665-fdf83442ed56c406d455173f2b4c978431c0ed69c25d61e31b4aa08f161353843</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4665-fdf83442ed56c406d455173f2b4c978431c0ed69c25d61e31b4aa08f161353843</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1600-0501.2010.02055.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1600-0501.2010.02055.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21198894$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Al-Marshood, Maysa M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Junker, Rudiger</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Rasheed, Abdulaziz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al Farraj Aldosari, Abdullah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jansen, John A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anil, Sukumaran</creatorcontrib><title>Study of the osseointegration of dental implants placed with an adapted surgical technique</title><title>Clinical oral implants research</title><addtitle>Clin Oral Implants Res</addtitle><description>Objective: To study the osseointegration of dental implants placed with a modified surgical technique in Beagle dogs and to compare it with the conventional method.
Materials and methods: Dental implants were placed bilaterally in the mandible of Beagle dogs using the press‐fit as well as undersized implant bed preparation technique. Micro computer tomography (micro‐CT) and histometric methods were used to analyze the bone implant contact and bone volume (BV) around the implants.
Results: The bone‐to‐implant contact percentage (BIC: expressed as %), first BIC (1st BIC: expressed in mm), sulcus depth (SD: expressed in mm) and connective tissue thickness (CT: expressed in mm) were analyzed for both groups. The BIC percentage was significantly higher for the undersized installed implants (P=0.0118). Also, a significant difference existed between the undersized and press‐fit installed implants for the first screw thread showing bone contact (P=0.0145). There were no significant differences in mucosal response (SD and CT) for both installation procedures. Also, no significant difference was found in the BV, as measured using micro‐CT, between the implants placed with an undersized technique (59.3±4.6) compared with the press‐fit implants (56.6±4.3).
Conclusion: From the observations of the study, it can be concluded that an undersized implant bed can enhance the implant–bone response.
To cite this article:
Al‐Marshood MM, Junker R, Al‐Rasheed A, Al Farraj Aldosari A, Jansen JA, Anil S. Study of the osseointegration of dental implants placed with an adapted surgical technique
Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 22, 2011; 753–759
doi: 10.1111/j.1600‐0501.2010.02055.x</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Bone implants</subject><subject>bone integration</subject><subject>Bone-implant interfaces</subject><subject>Computed tomography</subject><subject>Connective Tissue - physiology</subject><subject>Connective tissues</subject><subject>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods</subject><subject>Dental Implants</subject><subject>Dental materials</subject><subject>Dental prosthetics</subject><subject>Dental restorative materials</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Dogs</subject><subject>Implants, Experimental</subject><subject>Installation procedures</subject><subject>Instrumentation industry</subject><subject>Mandible</subject><subject>Mandible - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Mandible - surgery</subject><subject>Mucosa</subject><subject>Osseointegration</subject><subject>Osseointegration - physiology</subject><subject>primary stability</subject><subject>Screw threads</subject><subject>Surface Properties</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical implants</subject><subject>surgical technique</subject><subject>Surgical techniques</subject><subject>Transplants & implants</subject><subject>X-Ray Microtomography</subject><issn>0905-7161</issn><issn>1600-0501</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNUU1vEzEQtRCIhsJfQCtx4LRh_Ln2gQNNoSBFIKCoEhfLsb2Nw2Y32F41-fd4ScmBC_gy9sx782b8EKowzHE5rzZzLABq4IDnBEoWCHA-3z9As1PhIZqBAl43WOAz9CSlDQAIJdVjdEYwVlIqNkPfv-bRHaqhrfLaV0NKfgh99rfR5DD0U975PpuuCttdZ_qcqhKsd9VdyOvK9JVxZpfLO43xNtgCzN6u-_Bz9E_Ro9Z0yT-7j-fo27u314v39fLT1YfFm2VtmRC8bl0rKWPEOy4sA-EY57ihLVkxqxrJKLbgnVCWcCewp3jFjAHZlrUop6V-jl4e--7iUGRT1tuQrO_KuH4Yk5aSAsONEP9GNlgJrigpyBd_ITfDGPuyhiZAFS6DN5OyPKJsLD8Xfat3MWxNPGgMejJKb_Tkh5780JNR-rdRel-oz-8FxtXWuxPxjzMF8PoIuAudP_x3Y71YfpluhV8f-SFlvz_xTfyhRUMbrm8-XukbeXF5Sa4v9Gf6C7J-ruQ</recordid><startdate>201107</startdate><enddate>201107</enddate><creator>Al-Marshood, Maysa M.</creator><creator>Junker, Rudiger</creator><creator>Al-Rasheed, Abdulaziz</creator><creator>Al Farraj Aldosari, Abdullah</creator><creator>Jansen, John A.</creator><creator>Anil, Sukumaran</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201107</creationdate><title>Study of the osseointegration of dental implants placed with an adapted surgical technique</title><author>Al-Marshood, Maysa M. ; Junker, Rudiger ; Al-Rasheed, Abdulaziz ; Al Farraj Aldosari, Abdullah ; Jansen, John A. ; Anil, Sukumaran</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4665-fdf83442ed56c406d455173f2b4c978431c0ed69c25d61e31b4aa08f161353843</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Bone implants</topic><topic>bone integration</topic><topic>Bone-implant interfaces</topic><topic>Computed tomography</topic><topic>Connective Tissue - physiology</topic><topic>Connective tissues</topic><topic>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods</topic><topic>Dental Implants</topic><topic>Dental materials</topic><topic>Dental prosthetics</topic><topic>Dental restorative materials</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Dogs</topic><topic>Implants, Experimental</topic><topic>Installation procedures</topic><topic>Instrumentation industry</topic><topic>Mandible</topic><topic>Mandible - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Mandible - surgery</topic><topic>Mucosa</topic><topic>Osseointegration</topic><topic>Osseointegration - physiology</topic><topic>primary stability</topic><topic>Screw threads</topic><topic>Surface Properties</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical implants</topic><topic>surgical technique</topic><topic>Surgical techniques</topic><topic>Transplants & implants</topic><topic>X-Ray Microtomography</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Al-Marshood, Maysa M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Junker, Rudiger</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Rasheed, Abdulaziz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al Farraj Aldosari, Abdullah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jansen, John A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anil, Sukumaran</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical oral implants research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Al-Marshood, Maysa M.</au><au>Junker, Rudiger</au><au>Al-Rasheed, Abdulaziz</au><au>Al Farraj Aldosari, Abdullah</au><au>Jansen, John A.</au><au>Anil, Sukumaran</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Study of the osseointegration of dental implants placed with an adapted surgical technique</atitle><jtitle>Clinical oral implants research</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Oral Implants Res</addtitle><date>2011-07</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>753</spage><epage>759</epage><pages>753-759</pages><issn>0905-7161</issn><eissn>1600-0501</eissn><abstract>Objective: To study the osseointegration of dental implants placed with a modified surgical technique in Beagle dogs and to compare it with the conventional method.
Materials and methods: Dental implants were placed bilaterally in the mandible of Beagle dogs using the press‐fit as well as undersized implant bed preparation technique. Micro computer tomography (micro‐CT) and histometric methods were used to analyze the bone implant contact and bone volume (BV) around the implants.
Results: The bone‐to‐implant contact percentage (BIC: expressed as %), first BIC (1st BIC: expressed in mm), sulcus depth (SD: expressed in mm) and connective tissue thickness (CT: expressed in mm) were analyzed for both groups. The BIC percentage was significantly higher for the undersized installed implants (P=0.0118). Also, a significant difference existed between the undersized and press‐fit installed implants for the first screw thread showing bone contact (P=0.0145). There were no significant differences in mucosal response (SD and CT) for both installation procedures. Also, no significant difference was found in the BV, as measured using micro‐CT, between the implants placed with an undersized technique (59.3±4.6) compared with the press‐fit implants (56.6±4.3).
Conclusion: From the observations of the study, it can be concluded that an undersized implant bed can enhance the implant–bone response.
To cite this article:
Al‐Marshood MM, Junker R, Al‐Rasheed A, Al Farraj Aldosari A, Jansen JA, Anil S. Study of the osseointegration of dental implants placed with an adapted surgical technique
Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 22, 2011; 753–759
doi: 10.1111/j.1600‐0501.2010.02055.x</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>21198894</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02055.x</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0905-7161 |
| ispartof | Clinical oral implants research, 2011-07, Vol.22 (7), p.753-759 |
| issn | 0905-7161 1600-0501 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_883041766 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | Animals Bone implants bone integration Bone-implant interfaces Computed tomography Connective Tissue - physiology Connective tissues Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods Dental Implants Dental materials Dental prosthetics Dental restorative materials Dentistry Dogs Implants, Experimental Installation procedures Instrumentation industry Mandible Mandible - diagnostic imaging Mandible - surgery Mucosa Osseointegration Osseointegration - physiology primary stability Screw threads Surface Properties Surgery Surgical implants surgical technique Surgical techniques Transplants & implants X-Ray Microtomography |
| title | Study of the osseointegration of dental implants placed with an adapted surgical technique |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T13%3A22%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Study%20of%20the%20osseointegration%20of%20dental%20implants%20placed%20with%20an%20adapted%20surgical%20technique&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20oral%20implants%20research&rft.au=Al-Marshood,%20Maysa%20M.&rft.date=2011-07&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=753&rft.epage=759&rft.pages=753-759&rft.issn=0905-7161&rft.eissn=1600-0501&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02055.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E871965932%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2039166574&rft_id=info:pmid/21198894&rfr_iscdi=true |