Histomorphologic and histomorphometric evaluation of various endosseous implant healing chamber configurations at early implantation times: a study in dogs

Abstract

Regardless of healing chamber design and dimensions considered, healing allowed the devices osseointegration. However, healing chamber configuration significantly affected osseointegration measurable parameters such as BIC.

Osseointegration: Hierarchical designing encompassing the macrometer, micrometer, and nanometer length scales

“…The early healing biology and kinetics of bone formation in healing chambers has been discussed in detail by Berglundh et al [42] while the effect of healing chamber size and shape on bone formation has been explored elsewhere [43,44]. Such healing chambers, filled with the blood clot, will evolve toward osteogenic tissue that subsequently ossifies through an intramembranous-like pathway [42].…”

“…These void spaces left between bone and implant bulk, often referred as healing chambers, will be filled with blood clot immediately after placement and will not contribute to primary stability . These however, have been regarded as a key contributor to secondary stability [23,43].…”

“…Such healing configuration thus allows new bone formation throughout the healing chamber from all available surfaces (implant surface, instrumented bone surface) and within the chamber volume. Thus, intramembranous-like healing mode presents substantial deviation from the classic interfacial remodeling healing pathway observed in tight fit screw-type implant [21,41,43]. …”

Surface Characterization and In Vivo Evaluation of Dual Acid-Etched and Grit-Blasted/Acid-Etched Implants in Sheep

“…Despite the different surface characteristics presented by the groups, the same macrogeometry allowed the formation of healing chambers when proper instrumentation was applied, which played a pivotal role on osseointegration through an intramembranouslike ossification pathway. 35,45,46 The mechanical torque test has been classically used for screwthreaded machined implants and allows indirect quantitative measurements of the required shear force to disrupt the bone-implant interface. 47 Mechanical testing has also been regarded as an adequate complement to histologic and histomorphometric findings because it may detect differences in bone mechanical properties around implants that present comparable BIC and BAFO measurements.…”

“…3,4,7,10,[30][31][32] Several parameters of implant surface, such as chemical modifications, 33 addition of growth factors, 13,34 macrotopography, 35 and microtopography, 36 play an integrated role on bone formation and maturation 37 during the osseointegration process. From a clinical perspective, this leads to a shortened treatment period and improved oral health-related quality of life.…”