Stimulation of directed bone growth at oxidized titanium implants by macroscopic grooves: An in vivo study

Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research

Volumn 7, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2005, Pages s76-s82

  Hall, Jan ^a   Miranda Burgos, Patricia ^b   Sennerby, Lars ^b  

^a Nobel Biocare AB   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Experimental study; Histology; Removal torque

Indexed keywords

TITANIUM;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; BONE GROWTH; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEVICE REMOVAL; FOLLOW UP; HISTOLOGY; IN VIVO STUDY; MORPHOMETRICS; NONHUMAN; RABBIT; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; STIMULATION; TOOTH IMPLANTATION; TOOTH PROSTHESIS; TORQUE;

EID: 20744444530     PISSN: 15230899     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2005.tb00078.x     Document Type: Article

References (27)

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; 106:527-551.
2. Wennerberg A. On surface roughness and implant incorporation. Göteborg, Sweden: University of Göteborg, 1996. (Thesis)
3. Ericsson I, Johansson CB, Bystedt H, Norton MR. A histomorphometric evaluation of bone-to-implant contact on machine-prepared and roughened titanium dental implants. A pilot study in the dog. Clin Oral Implants Res 1994; 5:202-206.
4. Gotfredsen K, Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Anchorage of titanium implants with different surface characteristics: an experimental study in rabbits. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2000; 2:120-128.
5. Qahash M, Wikesjö UM, Thomson RC, Cook AD, Wozney JM, Hardwick WR. Surface-etching improves dental implant osseointegration in newly formed and native bone. J Dent Res 2002; 81: IADR-Abstract 4000.
6. Lima LA, Fuchs-Wehrle AM, Lang NP, et al. Surface characteristics of implants influence their bone integration after simultaneous placement of implant and GB membrane. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003; 14:669-679.
7. Hall J, Lausmaa J. Properties of a new porous oxide surface on titanium implants. Appl Osseointegration Res 2000; 1:5-8.
8. Albrektsson T, Johansson C, Lundgren AK, Sul Y, Gottlow J. Experimental studies on oxidized implants. A histomorphometrical and biomechanical analysis. Appl Osseointegration Res 2000; 1:21-24.
9. Ivanoff C-J, Widmark G, Johansson C, Wennerberg A. Histologic evaluation of bone response to oxidized and turned titanium micro-implants in human jawbone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003; 3:341-348.
10. Zechner W, Tangl S, Fürst G, et al. Osseous healing characteristics of three different implant types. A histologic and histomorphometric study in mini-pigs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003; 14:150-157.
11. Albrektsson T, Johansson C, Lundgren AK, Sul Y, Gottlow J. Experimental studies on oxidized implants. A histomorphometrical and biomechanical analysis. Appl Osseointegration Res 2000; 1:21-24.
12. Henry P, Tan A, Allan B, Hall J, Johansson C. Removal torque comparison of TiUnite and turned implants in the greyhound dog mandible. Appl Osseointegration Res 2000; 1:15-17.
13. Glauser R, Ree A, Lundgren A, Gottlow J, Hammerle CH, Scharer P. Immediate occlusal loading of Brånemark implants applied in various jawbone regions: a prospective, 1-year clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2001; 3:204-213.
14. Glauser R, Lundgren AK, Gottlow J, et al. Immediate occlusal loading of Brånemark TiUnite implants placed predominantly in soft bone: 1-year results of a prospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003; 5(Suppl 1):47-56.
15. Glauser R, Gottlow J, Lundgren AK, Sennerby L, Portmann M, Ruhstaller P, et al. Immediate occlusal loading of Brånemark MK IV TiUnite implants placed in bone quality type 4. Appl Osseointegration Res 2002; 3:22-24.
16. Rocci A, Martignoni M, Burgos P, Gottlow J, Sennerby L. Histology of retrieved immediately and early loaded oxidized implants. Light microscopic observations after 5 to 9 months of loading in the posterior mandible of 5 cases. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003; 5(Suppl 1):88-98.
17. Lundgren S, Brechter M. Preliminary findings of using oxidized titanium implants in reconstructive jaw surgery. Appl Osseointegration Res 2002; 3:35-39.
18. Pilliar RM, Deporter DA, Watson PA, Todescan R. The Endopore implant-enhanced osseointegration with a sintered porous-surfaced design. Oral Health 1998; 88:61-64.
19. Ryu HS, Kim SJ, Kim JH, et al. Fabrication of 1-dimensional porous hydroxyapatite and evaluation of its osteoconductivity. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2004; 15:267-73.
20. Schüpbach P, Glauser R, Rocci A, et al. The human bone-oxidized titanium implant interface. A light microscopic, scanning electron microscopic, back-scatter scanning electron microscopic and energy-dispersive x-ray study of clinically retrieved dental implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005;7(Suppl 1):36-43.
21. Boyan BD, Lossdorfer S, Wang L, et al. Osteoblasts generate an osteogenic microenvironment when grown on surfaces with rough microtopographies. Eur Cell Mater 2003; 6:22-27.
22. den Braber Brunette DM, Chehroudi B. The effects of the surface topography of micromachined titanium substrata on cell behavior in vitro and in vivo. J Biomech Eng 1999; 121:49-57.
23. Boyan BD, Bonewald LF, Paschalis EP, et al. Osteoblast-mediated mineral deposition in culture is dependent on surface microtopography. Calcif Tissue Int 2002; 71:519-529.
24. Davies JE. Understanding peri-implant endosseous healing. J Dent Educ 2003; 67:932-49.
25. de Bruijn JD, van Blitterswijk CA, Davies JE. Initial bone matrix formation at the hydroxyapatite interface in vivo. J Biomed Mater Res 1995; 29:89-99.
26. van Blitterswijk CA, Bakker D, Hesseling SC, Koerten HK. Reactions of cells at implant surfaces. Biomaterials 1991; 12:187-93.
27. Miranda-Burgos P, Sennerby L, Hall J. A biomechanical and histological evaluation of oxidized titanium implants with an 80, 110 or a 160 μm wide groove added to one thread flank. A study in the rabbit. (Submitted).