Accelerated Healing Period with Hydrophilic Implant Placed in Sheep Tibia

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the early osseointegration of two different implants surfaces, a sandblasted and acid-etched surface (TN) compared with same geometry and surface roughness modified to be hydrophilic/wettable by conditioning in an isotonic solution of 0.9% sodium-chloride (TA) through histological and histomorphometric analysis after sheep tibia implantation. Forty dental implants, divided in two groups (TN and TA) were placed in the left tibia of twenty healthy, skeletally mature Santa Ines sheep (n=5/experimental period). After 7, 14, 21 and 28 days post-implantation, the samples were removed and the sheep were kept alive. Analysis of resin sections (30 μm) allowed the quantification of bone area (BA) and bone-to-implant contact (BIC). TA group presented nearly 50% increase in BA at 14 days (p<0.001, ANOVA -Tukey's post test) compared with 7 days. The TA presented higher values than the TN for BA and BIC at 14, 21, and 28 days after placement, stabilizing bone healing. TA hydrophilic surface promoted early osseointegration at 14 and 21 days compared to TN, accelerating bone healing period post-implant placement in sheep tibia.

Enhanced Biocompatibility and Antibacterial Activity of Selective Laser Melting Titanium with Zinc-Doped Micro-Nano Topography

“…Compared to hydrophobic surfaces, hydrophilic surfaces significantly promote cellular attachment and proliferation [44]. In addition, implants with significant wettability decrease the postimplant healing period and accelerate early osseointegration [45][46][47]. MAO, 1 mM-Zn, and 100 μM-Zn samples were all evaluated with high surface hydrophilicity by water contact angle analysis.…”

Can changes in implant macrogeometry accelerate the osseointegration process?: An in vivo experimental biomechanical and histological evaluations

“…Several studies had proposed that the morphological alterations on the implant surface characteristics can improving and accelerating the osseointegration process (healing of bone around the implant) [7][8][9][10]. Thus, the present study had the aim of evaluated both implant models (regular and new implant mcrogeometry) with the same surface treatment, to verify the importance of this factor (the macrogeometry) in the early time period of osseointegration.…”

“…Even with the high success rates achieved by implants, studies have been made to accelerate the osseointegration with different technologies and manufactures methods. In this sense, alterations in the micro-and macrogeometry of the implant design are presented [6][7][8]. New surface treatments (micro topography), changing the physical and/or chemical characteristics [6,9,10], and new macrogeometries changing the implant design [11][12][13], are created by the researchers and, posteriorly, manufactured by the industry.…”

<p>The Influence of Nanostructured Hydroxyapatite Surface in the Early Stages of Osseointegration: A Multiparameter Animal Study in Low-Density Bone</p>

“…The pelvic animal model was used for all experiments according to previous research. 30,[33][34][35][36] The cranial part of each animal's right iliac wing (n = 5/group) received all implants ( Figure 1). Five implants were installed in each animal, but only three were used for this study.…”

“…43 Previous studies of dental-implant designs and surface have used sheep, 30,[33][34][35][36]45 rabbits, 4,20,46 and dogs [47][48][49] as animal models. The most used sites in these animals are the jaw 47,48 or tibia 49 in dogs; the tibia 4,20,46,50 in rabbits; and the tibia, 34,35 iliac crest, 30,33,36,45 and mandible 51 in sheep. The iliac crest site offers the advantages of bone characteristics, the absence of postoperative morbidity, and the ability to conduct a high number of implants test simultaneously; however, although the iliac crest exhibits low bone density, the cortical is thicker relative to the thin cortical of the posterior region of the maxilla, which also shows low bone density.…”