Premium
Mechano‐adaptive Responses of Alveolar Bone to Implant Hyper‐loading in a pre‐clinical in vivo model
Author(s) -
Tian Ye,
Li Zhijun,
Chen Jinlong,
Yuan Xue,
Sadowsky Steven J.,
Coyac Benjamin R.,
Brunski John B.,
Helms Jill A.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/clr.13662
Subject(s) - osseointegration , implant , dental alveolus , dentistry , bone remodeling , masticatory force , resonance frequency analysis , mandible (arthropod mouthpart) , bone resorption , molar , medicine , orthodontics , surgery , botany , biology , genus
Objectives Oral implants transmit biting forces to peri‐implant bone. In turn, those forces subject peri‐implant bone to mechanical stresses and strains. Here, our objective was to understand how peri‐implant bone responded to conditions of normal versus hyper‐loading in a mouse model. Material and Methods Sixty‐six mice were randomly assigned to 2 groups; both groups underwent bilateral maxillary first molar extraction followed by complete healing. Titanium alloy implants were placed in healed sites and positioned below the occlusal plane. After osseointegration, a composite crown was affixed to the implant so masticatory loading would ensue. In controls, the remaining dentition was left intact but in the hyper‐loaded (test) group, the remaining molars were extracted. 3D finite element analysis (FEA) calculated peri‐implant strains resulting from normal and hyper‐loading. Peri‐implant tissues were analyzed at multiple time points using micro‐computed tomography (µCT) imaging, histology, enzymatic assays of bone remodeling, and vital dye labeling to evaluate bone accrual. Results Compared to controls, hyper‐loaded implants experienced a 3.6‐fold increase in occlusal force, producing higher peri‐implant strains. Bone formation and resorption were both significantly elevated around hyper‐loaded implants, eventually culminating in a significant increase in peri‐implant bone volume/total volume (BV/TV). In our mouse model, masticatory hyper‐loading of an osseointegrated implant was associated with increased peri‐implant strain, increased peri‐implant bone remodeling, and a net gain in bone deposition. Conclusion Hyper‐loading results in bone strain with catabolic and anabolic bone responses, leading to a net gain in bone deposition.