Journal of Korean Dental Science

Korean Academy of Dental Science (대한치의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Bone Response to Anodized Titanium Implants in Rabbits

  • Lee, Jae-Hyun (Department of Implantology, Graduate School of Clinical Dental Science, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Lee, Cheol-Won (Department of Implantology, Graduate School of Clinical Dental Science, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Kim, Chang-Hyen (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Pyo, Sung-Woon (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea)
  • Received : 2011.05.02
  • Accepted : 2011.06.08
  • Published : 2011.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The quality of implant surface is one of the factors that influence wound healing of implant site and subsequently affect osseointegration. The objective of modification of the surface properties of an implant is to affect the biological consequence. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the biologic response of osseous tissue to anodized implants. Materials and Methods: Two machined titanium implants for control group were installed in a tibia of each rabbit and two anodized implants for test group were installed in the other tibia of each rabbit. At the moment the implants were installed, resonance frequency analysis (RFA) values were measured. After healing periods of 1, 2, 3, and 7 weeks, the implants were uncovered and RFA values were measured again. Removal torque was measured for one implant in the test group and one implant in the control group. Histological evaluation was executed in the other implants. Results: Both of test group and control group have the tendency of greater RFA change rate and removal torque value as healing periods became longer, but were statistically insignificant (P>0.05). However, in the case of the same healing period, the test group tended to have greater RFA change rate and removal torque than the control group (P<0.05). More active new bone formation from endosteal surface was noted on the anodized surface than machined surface in specimen after 1 week. There were no significant differences between the test group and control group in histological evaluations. Conclusion: In summary, the anodized surface showed slightly favorable results and it is postulated that it may facilitate improved stability in bone.

Keywords

References

  1. Esposito M, Hirsch JM, Lekholm U, Thomsen P. Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants.(I).Success criteria and epidemiology. Eur J Oral Sci. 1998; 106: 527-51. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0909-8836..t01-2-.x
  2. Triplett RG, Frohberg U, Sykaras N, Woody RD. Implant materials, design, and surface topographies: their influence on osseointegration of dental implants. J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2003; 13: 485-501.
  3. Sul YT, Johansson CB, Jeong Y, Albrektsson T. The electrochemical oxide growth behaviour on titanium in acid and alkaline electrolytes. Med Eng Phys. 2001; 23: 329-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1350-4533(01)00050-9
  4. Davis JE. Mechanisms of endoosseous integration. Int J Prothodont. 1998; 11: 391-401.
  5. Lausmaa J, Kasemo B, Rolander U, Bjursten LM, Ericson LE, Rosander L, Thomsen P. Preparation, surface spectroscopic and electron microscopic characterization of titanium implant materials. In: Ratner BD: Surface Characterization of Biomaterials. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1988: 161-74.
  6. Kasemo B, Lausmaa J. Biomaterial and implant surfaces: a surface science approach. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1988; 3: 247-59.
  7. Sul YT, Johansson CB, Petronis S, Krozer A, Jeong Y, Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T. Characteristics of the surface oxides on turned and electrochemically oxidized pure titanium implants up to dielectric breakdown: the oxide thickness, micropore configurations, surface roughness, crystal structure and chemical composition. Biomaterials. 2002; 23: 491-501. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(01)00131-4
  8. Larsson C, Emanuelsson L, Thomsen P, Ericson LE, Aronsson BO, Kasemo B, Lausmaa J. Bone response to surface-modified titanium implants-studies on the tissue response after one year to machined and electropolished implants with different oxide thicknesses. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 1997; 8: 721-9. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018548225899
  9. Ichikawa T, Hanawa T, Ukai H , Murakami K. Three-dimensional bone response to commercially pure titanium, hydroxyapatite, and calciumion- mixing titanium in rabbits. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2000; 15: 231-8.
  10. Fini M, Cigada A, Rondelli G, Chiesa R, Giardino R, Giavaresi G, Nicoli Aldini N, Torricelli P, Vicentini B. In vitro and in vivo behavior of Ca-and P-enriched anodized titanium. Biomaterials. 1999; 20: 1587-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(99)00060-5
  11. Sul YT, Johansson CB, Jeong Y, Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T. Resonance frequency and removal torque analysis of implants with turned and anodized surface oxides. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2002; 13: 252-9. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130304.x
  12. Albrektsson T, Johanson C, Lundgren AK, Sul YT, Gottlow J. Experimental studies on oxidized implants. A Histomorphometrical and biomechanical analysis. Appl Osseointegration Res. 2000; 1: 21-4.
  13. Gottlow J, Johansson C, Albrektsson T, Lundgren AK. Biomechanical and histologic evaluation of the TiUnite and Osseotite implant surfaces in rabbits after six weeks of healing. Appl Osseointegration Res. 2000; 1: 25-7.
  14. Li LH, Kong YM, Kim HW, Kim YW, Kim HE, Heo SJ, Koak JY. Improved biological performance of Ti implants due to surface modification by micro-arc oxidation. Biomaterials. 2004; 25: 2867-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.09.048
  15. Donath K, Breuner G. A method for the study of undecalcified bones and teeth with attached soft tissues. the Säge-Schilff(sawing and grinding technique). J Oral Pathol. 1982; 11: 318-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0714.1982.tb00172.x
  16. Deporter D, Watson P, Pharoah M, Levy D, Todescan R. Five-to sixyear results of a porspective clinical trial using the ENDOPORE dental implant and a mandibular overdenture. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1999; 10: 95-102. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1999.100203.x
  17. Buser D, Nydegger T, Oxland T, Cochran DL, Schenk RK, Hirt HP, Snétivy D, Nolte LP. Interface shear strength of titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a biomechanical study in the maxilla of miniature pigs. J Biomed Mater Res. 1999; 45: 75-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199905)45:2<75::AID-JBM1>3.0.CO;2-P
  18. Li J, Hastings GW. Oxide ceramics: inert ceramic materials in medicine and dentistry. In: Black J, Hastings G: Handbook of biomaterial properties. 1st ed. London: Chapman & Hall; 1998: 340-54.
  19. Ishizawa H, Fujino M, Ogino M. Mechanical and histological investigation of hydrothermally treated and untreated anodic titanium oxide films containing Ca and P. J Biomed Mater Res. 1995; 29: 1459-68. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820291118
  20. Larssons C. The interface between bone and implant with different surface oxide implants. Appl Osseointegration Res. 2000; 1: 9-14.
  21. Sul YT, Johnasson CB, Röser K, Albrektsson T. Qualitative and quantitavie observation of bone tissue reaction to anodized implants. Biomaterials. 2002; 23: 1809-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(01)00307-6
  22. Sul YT, Johansson CB, Kang Y, Jeon DG, Albrektsson T. Bone reactions to oxidized titanium implants with electrochemical anion sulphuric acid and phosphoric acid incorporation. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2002; 4: 78-87. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2002.tb00156.x
  23. Rompen E, DaSilva D, Lundgren AK, Gottlow J, Sennerby L. Stability measurements of a double-threaded titanium implant design with turned or oxidized surfaces . An experimental resonance frequency analysis study in the dog mandible. Appl Osseointegration Res. 2000; 1: 18-20.
  24. Rasmusson L, Meredith N, Kahnberg KE, Sennerby L. Stability assessments and histology of titanium implants placed simultaneously with autogenous onlay bone in the rabbit tibia. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998; 27: 229-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0901-5027(98)80019-2
  25. Glauser R, Portmann M, Ruhstaller P,Lundgren A, Hämmerle C, Gottlow J. Stability measurements of immediately loaded machined and oxidized implants in the posterior maxilla. A comparative clinical study using resonance frequency analysis. Appl Osseointegration Res. 2001; 2: 27-9.
  26. Robert WE. Bone physiology, metabolism and biomechanics in orthodontic practice. In: Graber TM, Vanasdall RJ Jr: Orthodonticscurrent principlesand techniques. St Louis: Mosby; 1994: 193-234.
  27. Roccuzzo M, Bunino M, Prioglio F, Bianchi SD. Early loading of sandblasted and acid etched(SLA) implants: a prospective split-mouth comparative study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001; 12: 572-8. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.120604.x
  28. Dahlin C, Sennerby L, Lekholm U, Linde A, Nyman S. Generation of new bone around titanium implants using a membrane technique: an experimental study in rabbits. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1989; 4: 19-25.