The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of the remnants of two suture materials on osseointegration of titanium implants in a rabbit tibial model. Calibrated defects were prepared in the tibia of five Chinchilla rabbits. Filaments of nonresorbable (NR) nylon or resorbable (R) chitosan were placed at the bone to implant interface, whereas control sites had no suture material. After a healing period of 4 weeks, a pull-out test procedure was performed followed by enzymatic analyses of the wound fluid and relative quantification of mRNA levels for bone-related and cytokine markers from the peri-implant bone. A trend toward a reduced pull-out force was observed in the NR group (NR: 23.0 ± 12.8 N; R: 33.9 ± 11.3 N; control: 33.6 ± 24.0 N). Similarly, the bone resorption marker vacuolar type H+-ATPase was increased in the NR group compared with that in the control group (P = 0.041). The R group showed trends for lower alkaline phosphatase activity and osteocalcin expression and higher total protein content and RNA compared with the control group. In this submerged healing model, peri-implant bone healing was marginally affected by the two suture materials tested. However, there was a tendency toward better osseointegration and lower expression of bone resorption markers in the R group compared with the control group. (J Oral Sci 57, 219-227, 2015)Keywords: suture materials; chitosan; nylon; dental implants; bone; wound healing; osseointegration; biological complications.
IntroductionForeign materials, such as cement remnants from the supraconstruction, can sometimes lead to peri-implant tissue complications (1). Theoretically, suture remnants displaced toward the peri-implant bone may have a similar negative effect on the peri-implant tissues. The choice of suture material may potentially influence the outcome of periodontal and implant procedures (2,3). The ideal suture material should provide uncomplicated stable primary wound closure without affecting the treatment outcome negatively. However, suture materials often seem to worsen the inflammatory response for a variety of reasons (4); therefore, the selection of an appropriate material is important (5,6). Materials that minimize inflammatory reactions are preferred, particularly in an environment, such as the oral cavity, where microbial levels are high. Moreover, suture materials and their metabolites might affect the healing process, particularly after implant placement, and can also provide a route for communication between the fixture and the oral cavity (2). Moreover, the wicking effect of some suture types can result in harbouring and transporting bacteria to the depth of the wound; thus, evading the host defense mechanism, resulting in local infection and subsequent