A rabbit maxillary sinus model with simultaneous customized‐implant placement: Comparative microscopic analysis for the evaluation of surface‐treated implants

Abstract

We describe the use of a rabbit maxillary sinus model, characterized by thin osseous tissue and low bone density, for the evaluation of surface-treated implants by histologically and histomorphometrically comparing the osseointegration patterns depending on the surface treatment methods. Twenty rabbits were randomly assigned to two groups of 10 animals, one receiving 5 × 3 mm customized implants (machined, MA or sandblasted and acid etched, SLA) placed in sinus and the other receiving implants placed in a tibia. Histological observation of the implant placed in sinus shows relatively more active new bone formation, characterized by trabecular bone pattern underneath the cortical bone in sinus as compared with that in tibia. Histomorphometric analysis in the rabbits receiving implants in a tibia, the NBIC (%) associated with the SLA surface implant was greater than that associated with the MA implant at 2 weeks (55.63 ± 8.65% vs. 47.87 ± 10.01%; P > 0.05) and at 4 weeks (61.76 ± 9.49% vs. 42.69 ± 10.97%; P < 0.05). Among rabbits receiving implants in a sinus, the NBIC (%) associated with the SLA surface implant was significantly greater than that associated with the MA surface implant both at 2 weeks (37.25 ± 7.27% vs. 20.98 ± 6.42%; P < 0.05) and at 4 weeks (48.82 ± 6.77% vs. 31.51 ± 9.14%; P < 0.05). As a result, we suggest that the maxillary sinus model is an appropriate animal model for assessing surface-treated implants and may be utilized for the evaluation of surface-treated implants in poor bone quality environment. Microsc. Res. Tech. 78:697-706, 2015.

Pre-Clinical Models in Implant Dentistry: Past, Present, Future

“…Newly formed bone height is measurable following sinus floor elevation using a blood clot [ 333 ] or for pre-clinical testing of new bone substitute [ 334 ], giving an idea of how such materials are accepted in in vivo models. The poor bone quality of the maxillary sinus is also exploited for studying the impact of innovative surface properties in poor quality bone [ 335 ]. Studies in the mandible: Procedures are short, immediate extraction/implantation protocols being the most common.…”

In vivo osseointegration evaluation of implants coated with nanostructured hydroxyapatite in low density bone

“…Commercial pure titanium (Ti) and its alloys are biocompatible materials that facilitate the osseointegration of dental implants, ensure tissue healing without foreign body reactions, and confer favorable responses from adjacent cell populations [1]. However, with the evolution of surface treatments, the machined or minimally roughened Ti surfaces of dental implants have been replaced to ensure greater predictability, increase the survival rates of dental implants, and accelerate the osseointegration process [2][3][4][5], particularly in low density bone such as the posterior maxilla [6].…”

Parathyroid Hormone (1-34) Might Not Improve Early Bone Healing after Sinus Augmentation in Healthy Rabbits

“…The metabolic rate is three to four times faster in rabbits than in humans, and the effects on bone healing can be confirmed within weeks [ 25 ]. Several studies using this model have shown differences between control and experimental groups at healing periods of 2 and 4 weeks [ 26 – 28 ].…”