Comparative histomorphometry and resonance frequency analysis of implants with moderately rough surfaces in a loaded animal model

Al-Nawas, B.; Groetz, Knut A.; Goetz, Hermann; Duschner, H.; Wagner, Wilfried

doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01396.x

Cited by 79 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(31) found no correlation between bone-implant contact (BIC) and RFA, while Al-Nawas et al (32) confirmed the benefits of a rough implant surface for increased RFA-measured stability. Karl et al (33) compared the different locations of mandibular and maxillary ITI implants and found a significant correlation between these variables.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement of dental implant stability by resonance frequency analysis: A review of the literature

Quesada-García¹,

Prados-Sánchez²,

Olmedo-Gaya³

et al. 2009

Med Oral

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dental implant treatment is an excellent option for prosthetic restoration that is associated with high success rates. Implant stability is essential for a good outcome. The clinical assessment of osseointegration is based on mechanical stability rather than histological criteria, considering primary stability (absence of mobility in bone bed after implant insertion) and secondary stability (bone formation and remodelling at implant-bone interface). The aim of this study was to review the literature on Resonance Frequency Analysis (RFA) as a method for measuring dental implant stability. An online search of various databases was conducted on experimental and clinical research published between 1996 and 2008. The studies reviewed demonstrate the usefulness of RFA as a non-invasive method to assess implant stability. Further research is required to determine whether this system is also capable of measuring the degree of dental implant osseointegration.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement of dental implant stability by resonance frequency analysis: A review of the literature

Quesada-García¹,

Prados-Sánchez²,

Olmedo-Gaya³

et al. 2009

Med Oral

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to the mentioned parameters of the primary and secondary stability, the implant surface osteoconductive characteristics are factors which affect the implant bone response and quality of the bone implant interface [7,8]. Surface treatment helps to enhance secondary stability after insertion by promoting osseointegration [6,9,10]. Various methods have been developed and tested in order to coat metal implants, e.g., plasma spraying, sputter deposition, sol-gel coating, electrophoretic deposition or biomimetic precipitation [11,12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…During the osseointegration period, bone gradually remodels to the implant threads and thus the secondary stability is attained by direct bone to implant contact [5]. It is proportioned with implant success rate, depending on bone remodelling induced by a mechanical stress situation during the initial phase of bone healing and surface modification of the implants [6]. According to current literature, there are discussions concerning the ability of implants to withstand early or immediate loading in order to reduce waiting time for the patient.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early outcome of an implant system with a resorbable adhesive calcium–phosphate coating—a prospective clinical study in partially dentate patients

Palarie¹,

Bicer²,

Lehmann³

et al. 2011

Clin Oral Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to investigate the early outcome of a dental implant with bioactive calcium-phosphate (CaP) coating in the first year of usage in different clinical indications in partially edentulous patients, after early and delayed prosthetic loading. Therefore, in a prospective follow-up study, the cumulative survival and success rate of a conical, self-drilling and self-tapping implant system after 6 months and 1 year post-insertion was evaluated. A total of 311 CaP-coated implants were placed in 124 patients. Seventy-two implants in clinical high-quality bone situation were loaded after 2 weeks post-insertion with the definite restoration; the rest after 6 months. The indication for implant placement was treatment of partial dentate mandible and maxilla. One hundred sixty-three implants were placed in the posterior mandible, 117 in the posterior maxilla. In the frontal maxilla, 25 implants and in the frontal mandible, eight implants were used. In 126 cases (36%), bone augmentation procedures (guided bone regeneration and sinus lift) were performed concomitant with implant placement. The difference between primary and secondary stability (implant stability quotient (ISQ), Periotest, insertion torque), peri-implant clinical parameter as well as survival and success criteria were evaluated. In total, ISQ mean values after 6 months were higher than after implant placement. Periotest values increased in the period of the first 6 months and remained constant afterwards. After 6 months of insertion, the mean bone loss was 0.051 mm. After 12 months, a bone gain with a mean of +0.016 mm was observed; implants in the posterior maxilla showed significant less bone resorption than implants in the posterior mandible (p < 0.0001). In the most of the implants (74%), clinical normal gingival tissue could be observed. In 24%, a mild inflammation was analysed. In 35 implants, a provocation of peri-implant bleeding was possible. In the early loading group, no implant failure was seen. Altogether, one implant in D4 bone has been lost. The cumulative survival rate summed up to 99.7%. In general, implant success assessment analysis according to Albrektsson and Buser displayed success in 99.7% of the implants. With respect to the patient selection including 124 implants with minor and major augmentations as well as early loading prosthetic function, the 1-year clinical use of the studied implant system with CaP coating showed good results, comparable to that of conventional implants without a specific coating. After 1 year, neither special disadvantages nor benefits of CaP-coated implants could be evaluated. Long-term results are further needed.

show abstract

“…Thus, experimental studies comparing different types of surface and geometry of implants has been performed [6,[10][11][12][13]. However, few studies have compared the implants with hydrophilic sandblasted and acid etched surface with anodic oxidation surface in the early stages of bone repair [11].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The orientation of collagen fibers is strictly dependent on the shape of the implants [10]. Experimental studies have compared different types of implant surfaces and geometries [11][12][13]. However, few studies have compared chemically treated sandblast and acid etched, which is hydrophilic (modified), with anodic oxidized surface [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of the Early Stages of Osseointegration in Two Surfaces Dental Implants: Pilot Study

Munhoz¹

2015

Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparative histomorphometry and resonance frequency analysis of implants with moderately rough surfaces in a loaded animal model

Cited by 79 publications

References 43 publications

Measurement of dental implant stability by resonance frequency analysis: A review of the literature

Measurement of dental implant stability by resonance frequency analysis: A review of the literature

Early outcome of an implant system with a resorbable adhesive calcium–phosphate coating—a prospective clinical study in partially dentate patients

Analysis of the Early Stages of Osseointegration in Two Surfaces Dental Implants: Pilot Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About