Premium
Retrieved Implants from Irradiated Sites in Humans: A Histologic/Histomorphometric Investigation of Oral and Craniofacial Implants
Author(s) -
Bolind Pia,
Johansson Carina B.,
Johansson Petra,
Granström Gösta,
Albrektsson Tomas
Publication year - 2006
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/j.1708-8208.2006.00010.x
Subject(s) - implant , dentistry , craniofacial , connective tissue , bone tissue , materials science , medicine , jaw bone , hard tissue , biomedical engineering , surgery , pathology , psychiatry
Purpose The aim of this report was to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the tissue response to bone‐anchored implants retrieved from irradiated sites in patients. Materials and Methods The material consists of 23 consecutively received Brånemark ® implants (Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden) placed in pre‐ or postoperatively irradiated sites. Twenty‐two of the 23 implants were suitable for histologic evaluation of undecalcified sections in the light microscope. Results The oral implants with shorter time in situ demonstrated sparse bone to implant contact with mainly dense connective tissue in the interface. However, for implants with longer time in situ, high amounts of bone‐implant contact and bone fill of threads were noted. The mean values of bone‐implant contact and bone area within the thread were calculated to 40% (16–94) and 70% (13–96), respectively. The craniofacial implants, with the exception of two implants lined with a capsular formation, demonstrated mature and newly formed bone at the bone‐implant interface. The mean value for bone‐metal contact was calculated to 45 and 53% for two specimens. The mean value for bone area within the thread ranged from 65 to 88% for three specimens. Conclusion The possibility to achieve bone anchorage of implants in irradiated tissue was supported by the findings in this study. However, due to limited material, conclusions with regard to radiation dose and bone tissue response to implants cannot be stated.