Clinical Oral Implants Research · 2012 · 38 citations · 36 references
DentistryDental Biomaterials ScienceDental Materials ScienceBone GraftingImplant SurgeryTissue EngineeringBone Quality AssessmentBone Quantity AssessmentBone TissueCollagen-based BiomaterialsImplant MaterialsPeri-implant Tissue HealthBone Volume EvaluationBone Volume MeasurementImplant CoatingsOsteogenic DifferentiationOsteogenic MarkersPeri-implant Bone FormationPeri-implant Bone HealingPeri-implant Bone Regeneration
OBJECTIVE: The current study aimed to evaluate the osteogenic potential of electrosprayed organic and non-organic surface coatings in a gap-implant model over 4 and 12 weeks of implantation into the dog mandible. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixteen Beagle dogs received experimental titanium implants in the mandible 3 months after removal of left premolars (P2, P3 and P4). Three types of implants were installed in each animal: non-coated implant, nano-CaP coated implant and implant with type 1 collagen coating. Both micro-CT and histomorphometry were used to evaluate peri-implant bone response after implantation periods of 4 and 12 weeks. The bone area percentage was assessed histomorphometrically in three different zones (inner: 0-300 μm; middle: 300-600 μm; and outer: 600-1000 μm) around the implant surface. Bone-bridging of the gap was also calculated for each sample. RESULTS: Four weeks after implantation, nano-CaP and collagen-coated implants showed significantly higher bone volume (BV) in the inner zone compared with non-coated implants (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01). After 12 weeks, histomorphometric analysis showed comparable amounts of BV between all experimental groups. Also, no significant difference was found in the BV, as measured using micro-CT, between the implant groups. Absolute bone ingrowth measurements were highest for collagen-coated implants, but these differences were not significant. CONCLUSION: The obtained data failed to provide a consistent favourable effect on bone formation of the collagen coating over 3 months of implantation. It is concluded that the source of the collagen as well as the limited osseous environment overshadowed a possible effect of the applied implant surface modifications. Similarly, the tested nano-apatite surface coating did not improve peri-implant bone ingrowth into a gap-implant model.
36