Premium
Bone tissue formation around two titanium implant surfaces placed in bone defects filled with bone substitute material or blood clot: A pilot study
Author(s) -
Trento Guilherme dos Santos,
SpinNeto Rubens,
Bassi Ana Paula Farnezi,
Okamoto Roberta,
Gabrielli Marisa Aparecida Cabrini,
PereiraFilho Valfrido Antonio
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
clinical implant dentistry and related research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.338
H-Index - 85
eISSN - 1708-8208
pISSN - 1523-0899
DOI - 10.1111/cid.12855
Subject(s) - implant , tibia , materials science , biomedical engineering , dentistry , titanium , bone formation , medicine , surgery , metallurgy , endocrinology
Objectives The objective of this study was to evaluate the peri‐implant bone tissue formation around titanium implants with different surface treatments, placed in bone defects filled or not with bone substitute material (BSM). Materials and Methods Ten animals were divided into two groups according to implant surface treatment. In each tibia, a bone defect was created followed by the placement of one implant. On the left tibia, the defect was filled with blood clot (BC), and on the right tibia, the defect was filled with biphasic hydroxyapatite/β‐tricalcium‐phosphate (HA/TCP) generating four subgroups: BC‐N: blood clot and porous surface; BC‐A: blood clot and porous‐hydrophilic surface; HA/TCP‐N: BSM and porous surface; HA/TCP‐A: BSM and porous‐hydrophilic surface. The animals were submitted to euthanasia 60 days after implant installation. After light‐curing resin inclusion, the blocks containing the implant and the bone tissue were stained and evaluated by means of histomorphometry to assess the percentages of bone implant contact (% BIC). Data was normally distributed and the group differences were examined using the parametric tests of Two‐Way ANOVA. Results The BC‐A group presented the higher mean value of BIC (46.43%). The HA/TCP‐A group presented the higher mean value of BIC. The porous‐hydrophilic surfaces presented better results of BIC when compared to the porous surface in both conditions of defect filling. No statistically significant differences were found among all groups (95% confidence interval and P < .05). Conclusion According to histomorphometric analysis, after 60‐days in a rabbit model, hydrophilic and hydrophobic surfaces have the same behavior in the presence or absence of HA/TCP.