Within the limitation of this study, the bioactive fluoride-modified surface may show no superiority to the bioinert anodized surface in early bone response.

PurposeContact and distance osteogenesis occur around all endosseous dental implants. However, the mechanisms underlying these processes have not been fully elucidated. We hypothesized that these processes occur independently of each other. To test this, we used titanium (Ti) tubes to physically separate contact and distance osteogenesis, thus allowing contact osteogenesis to be measured in the absence of possible triggers from distance osteogenesis.MethodsSandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) and modified SLA (modSLA) implants were used. Both types had been sandblasted with large grit and then etched with acid. The modSLA implants then underwent additional treatment to increase hydrophilicity. The implants were implanted into rabbit tibiae, and half were implanted within Ti tubes. The bone-to-implant contact (BIC) ratio was calculated for each implant. Immunohistochemical analyses of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP)-2 expression and new bone formation (Masson trichrome stain) were performed.ResultsThe implants outside of Ti tubes were associated with good bone formation along the implant surface. Implantation within a Ti tube significantly reduced the BIC ratio (P<0.001). Compared with the modSLA implants, the SLA implants were associated with significantly higher BIC ratios, regardless of the presence or absence of Ti tubes (P=0.043). In the absence of Ti tubes, the bone adjacent to the implant had areas of new bone formation that expressed BMP-2 at high levels.ConclusionsThis study disproved the null hypothesis and suggested that contact osteogenesis is initiated by signals from the old bone that undergoes distance osteogenesis after drilling. This signal may be BMP-2.

Ultraviolet (UV) photofunctionalization has been suggested as an effective method to enhance the osseointegration of titanium surface. In this study, machined surface treated with UV light (M + UV) was compared to sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched (SLA) surface through in vitro and in vivo studies. Groups of titanium specimens were defined as machined (M), SLA, and M + UV for the disc type, and M + UV and SLA for the implant. The discs and implants were assessed using scanning electron microscopy, confocal laser scanning microscopy, electron spectroscopy for chemical analysis, and the contact angle. Additionally, we evaluated the cell attachment, proliferation assay, and real-time polymerase chain reaction for the MC3T3-E1 cells. In a rabbit tibia model, the implants were examined to evaluate the bone-to-implant contact ratio and the bone area. In the M + UV group, we observed the lower amount of carbon, a 0°-degree contact angle, and enhanced osteogenic cell activities (p < 0.05). The histomorphometric analysis showed that a higher bone-to-implant contact ratio was found in the M + UV implant at 10 days (p < 0.05). In conclusion, the UV photofunctionalization of a Ti dental implant with M surface attained earlier osseointegration than SLA.

No abstract

PurposeBone-to-implant contact (BIC) is difficult to measure on micro-computed tomography (CT) because of artifacts that hinder accurate differentiation of the bone and implant. This study presents an advanced algorithm for measuring BIC in micro-CT acquisitions using a spiral scanning technique, with improved differentiation of bone and implant materials.MethodsFive sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched implants were used. Three implants were subjected to surface analysis, and 2 were inserted into a New Zealand white rabbit, with each tibia receiving 1 implant. The rabbit was sacrificed after 28 days. The en bloc specimens were subjected to spiral (SkyScan 1275, Bruker) and round (SkyScan 1172, SkyScan 1275) micro-CT scanning to evaluate differences in the images resulting from the different scanning techniques. The partial volume effect (PVE) was optimized as much as possible. BIC was measured with both round and spiral scanning on the SkyScan 1275, and the results were compared.ResultsCompared with the round micro-CT scanning, the spiral scanning showed much clearer images. In addition, the PVE was optimized, which allowed accurate BIC measurements to be made. Round scanning on the SkyScan 1275 resulted in higher BIC measurements than spiral scanning on the same machine; however, the higher measurements on round scanning were confirmed to be false, and were found to be the result of artifacts in the void, rather than bone.ConclusionsThe results of this study indicate that spiral scanning can reduce metal artifacts, thereby allowing clear differentiation of bone and implant. Moreover, the PVE, which is a factor that inevitably hinders accurate BIC measurements, was optimized through an advanced algorithm.

Background Leukocyte‐ and platelet‐rich fibrin (L‐PRF) has been suggested to enhance bone healing and the effects of L‐PRF need to be evaluated in lateral residual alveolar bone augmentation. This in vivo study aimed to analyze the effects of L‐PRF as a membrane on bone regeneration in lateral residual alveolar augmentation. Methods Eight mongrel dogs were used; the mandibular premolars were extracted and then three lateral ridge defects were surgically created on each side of the arch. After 4 weeks, guided bone ridge augmentation was performed in each defect with the following treatment groups: N+D (nonresorbable membrane with deproteinized bovine bone mineral [DBBM]), N+B (nonresorbable membrane with β‐tricalcium phosphate [β‐TCP]), R+D (resorbable membrane with DBBM), R+B (resorbable membrane with β‐TCP), and P+D (L‐PRF with DBBM), and P+B (L‐PRF and β‐TCP). Following 4 weeks of bone healing, the new bone amount for each group was measured by light microscopy (primary outcome) and microcomputed tomography (micro‐CT) (secondary outcome). The mean values were compared at the 0.05 significance level. Results The P+D group showed the most newly formed bone in histology and in micro‐CT analyses. L‐PRF was more effective in bone regeneration when compared to nonresorbable and resorbable barrier membranes. Additionally, this study indicated DBBM was the more favorable osseous graft material for bone regeneration than β‐TCP when barrier membranes are used. Conclusion From the results of this in vivo study using surgically created defects, L‐PRF plays an effective role as a barrier membrane for lateral ridge augmentation. L‐PRF may be an excellent barrier membrane in place of other nonresorbable and resorbable membranes.

No abstract

We evaluated the shear bond strength of bone–implant contact, or osseointegration, in the rabbit tibia model, and compared the strength between grades 2 and 4 of commercially pure titanium (cp-Ti). A total of 13 grades 2 and 4 cp-Ti implants were used, which had an identical cylinder shape and surface topography. Field emission scanning electron microscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, and confocal laser microscopy were used for surface analysis. Four grades 2 and 4 cp-Ti implants were inserted into the rabbit tibiae with complete randomization. After six weeks of healing, the experimental animals were sacrificed and the implants were removed en bloc with the surrounding bone. The bone–implant interfaces were three-dimensionally imaged with micro-computed tomography. Using these images, the bone–implant contact area was measured. Counterclockwise rotation force was applied to the implants for the measurement of removal torque values. Shear bond strength was calculated from the measured bone–implant contact and removal torque data. The t-tests were used to compare the outcome measures between the groups, and statistical significance was evaluated at the 0.05 level. Surface analysis showed that grades 2 and 4 cp-Ti implants have similar topographic features. We found no significant difference in the three-dimensional bone–implant contact area between these two implants. However, grade 2 cp-Ti implants had a higher shear bond strength than grade 4 cp-Ti implants (p = 0.032). The surfaces of the grade 2 cp-Ti implants were similar to those of the grade 4 implants in terms of physical characteristics and the quantitative amount of attachment to the bone, whereas the grade 2 surfaces were stronger than the grade 4 surfaces in the bone–surface interaction, indicating osseointegration quality.