| 4000 Surface-etching Improves Dental Implant Osseointegration in Newly Formed and Native Bone | ||
|
M. QAHASH1, U.M. WIKESJÖ1, R.C. THOMSEN2, A.D. COOK2, J.M. WOZNEY3, and W.R. HARDWICK2, 1Temple University School of Dentistry, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc, Flagstaff, AZ, USA, 3Genetics Institute/Wyeth-Ayerst Research, Cambridge, MA, USA Objectives: Osseointegration (direct bone-implant contact; BIC) is fundamental to the longevity and successful service of the dental implant supported prosthesis. Dental implant design, biomaterials, and surface modifications may influence BIC in native bone. The influence of surface modifications on BIC in newly formed bone has not been well established. The objective of this study was to compare BIC at surface-etched and machined dental implants in newly formed and native bone. Methods: Supraalveolar, peri-implant defects were surgically created in eight Hound Labrador mongrel dogs. Two machined and one surface-etched 10-mm titanium dental implants were placed 5 mm into the surgically reduced alveolar crest creating 5-mm supraalveolar peri-implant defects. A recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) implant was used to induce bone formation in the supraalveolar peri-implant defect. A space-providing, macro-porous, expanded polytetrafluoroethylene membrane was used to outline the new bone formation. The animals were euthanized at 8 weeks postsurgery and block biopsies were processed for histologic and histometric analysis. Results: There were no significant differences in mean (± SD) bone density in rhBMP-2 induced bone at surface-etched and machined dental implants (20.6 ± 5.3% vs. 23.8 ± 4.7%; p=0.232). However, there was a small but significant difference in BIC in favor of the surface-etched dental implants (12.3 ± 6.8% vs. 7.9 ± 3.1%; p=0.05). Bone density in native bone amounted to 63.9 ± 7.5% and 64.5 ± 9.0% for surface-etched and machined dental implants, respectively (p=0.641). BIC in native resident bone was significantly increased at surface-etched compared to machined dental implants (59.7 ± 11.3% vs. 40.7 ± 21.2%; p=0.005). Conclusions: Surface-etching of dental implants has a positive effect on osseointegration in newly formed and native bone following an 8-week healing interval. Significant differences in bone density do not appear to influence this effect. | ||
| Seq #371 - Bone Response to Surfaces/Scaffolds 3:45 PM-5:45 PM, Saturday, 9 March 2002 San Diego Convention Center Room 10 (Upper Level) | ||
|
Back to the Implantology Research Program
| ||