Premium
Crestal remodelling and osseointegration at surface‐modified commercially pure titanium and titanium alloy implants in a canine model
Author(s) -
Lee Jaebum,
Hurson Steve,
Tadros Hatem,
Schüpbach Peter,
Susin Cristiano,
Wikesjö Ulf M. E.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
journal of clinical periodontology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.456
H-Index - 151
eISSN - 1600-051X
pISSN - 0303-6979
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-051x.2012.01905.x
Subject(s) - osseointegration , titanium , dentistry , implant , titanium alloy , materials science , buccal administration , alloy , dental implant , medicine , metallurgy , surgery
Background Ti ‐6 Al ‐7 Nb alloys exhibit enhanced mechanical properties and corrosion resistance and may represent an improvement to present commercially pure ( CP ) titanium oral implant technology. Objectives To evaluate crestal remodelling and osseointegration at CP titanium compared with Ti ‐6 Al ‐7 Nb alloy oral implants using a canine model. Methods Two threaded anodized CP titanium and two Ti ‐6 Al ‐7 Nb alloy anodized oral implants (ø4.5 × 6.1 mm) were placed into each jaw quadrant in the edentulated posterior mandible in six adult male Hound Labrador mongrel dogs. Abutments were placed onto the implants, and the mucogingival flaps were adapted and sutured for transmucosal wound healing. Block biopsies were collected for histometric analysis following an 8‐week healing interval. Results Healing was uneventful. Bone density outside and within the root of the threads averaged (± SE ) 49.0 ± 4.5% and 38.7 ± 5.1% for CP titanium implants and 43.2 ± 3.6% and 34.2 ± 4.8% for Ti ‐6 Al ‐7 Nb alloy implants. Mean osseointegration reached 68.0 ± 4.4% and 62.8 ± 2.5% for CP titanium and Ti ‐6 Al ‐7 Nb alloy implants, respectively. Although crestal resorption at lingual sites averaged 0.2 ± 0.1 mm for both technologies, crestal resorption at buccal sites averaged 0.9 ± 0.2 and 1.0 ± 0.6 mm for CP titanium and Ti ‐6 Al ‐7 Nb alloy implants, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between implant technologies for any parameter assessed. Notably, advanced/advancing buccal crestal resorption exposing the implant threads was observed in 50% of the implants (four of six animals) regardless of implant technology; osteoclastic resorption still observed at 8 weeks following implant placement. Conclusion Within the limitations of study, anodized Ti ‐6 Al ‐7 Nb alloy implants may represent a feasible alternative to benchmark anodized CP titanium implants. Remodelling of the buccal crestal plate resulting in advanced bone loss appears a major impediment to oral implant osseointegration and possibly, in extension, implant maintenance.