Early wound healing around endosseous implants: A review of the literature

International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 425-431

  Raghavendra, Sangeetha ^a   Wood, Marjorie C ^a   Taylor, Thomas D ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT SCHOOL OF DENTAL MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT HEALTH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Bone healing; Bone implant interface; Dental implants; Early wound healing; Wound healing

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; BONE DEVELOPMENT; BONE REGENERATION; BONE TISSUE; HUMAN; JAW; NONHUMAN; OSSIFICATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REVIEW; SURFACE PROPERTY; TISSUE CULTURE; TOOTH IMPLANTATION; TOOTH PROSTHESIS; TOPOGRAPHY; WOUND HEALING;

ANIMALS; DENTAL IMPLANTS; DENTAL PROSTHESIS DESIGN; HUMANS; JAW; OSSEOINTEGRATION; OSTEOGENESIS; WOUND HEALING;

EID: 21344445511     PISSN: 08822786     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (50)

1. Urist MR. Bone: Formation by autoinduction. 1965. Clin Orthop 2002;395:4-10.
2. Davies JE. Bone Engineering. Toronto: Em Squared, 2000:1-11, 295, 582, 583.
3. Brånemark P-I, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T (eds).Tissue-Integrated Prostheses: Osseointegration in Clinical Dentistry. Chicago: Quintessence, 1985:11.
4. Albrektsson T, Johansson C. Osteoinduction, osteoconduction and osseointegration. Eur Spine J 2001;10(suppl 2):S96-S101.
5. Schröeder A, Pohler O, Sutter F. Gewebereaktion auf ein Titan-Hohlzylinderimplantat mit Titan-Spritzschichtoberfläche. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd 1976;86:713-727.
6. Cooper LF. Biologic determinants of bone formation for osseointegration: Clues for future clinical improvements. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:439-449.
7. Davies JE. Mechanisms of endosseous integration. Int J Prosthodont 1998;11391-401.
8. Boyan BD, Hummert TW, Dean DD, Schwartz Z. Role of material surfaces in regulating bone and cartilage cell response. Biomaterials 1996;17:137-146.
9. Kieswetter K, Schwartz Z, Dean DD, Boyan BD. The role of implant surface characteristics in the healing of bone. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 1996;7:329-345.
10. Schwartz Z, Boyan BD. Underlying mechanisms at the bonebiomaterial interface. J Cell Biochem 1994;56:340-347.
11. Jayaraman M, Meyer U, Buhner M, Joos U, Wiesmann HP. Influence of titanium surfaces on attachment of osteoblast-like cells in vitro. Biomaterials 2004;25:625-631.
12. 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.
13. Davies JE. In vitro modeling of the bone/implant interface. Anat Rec 1996;245:426-445.
14. Osborn JF, Newesley H. Dynamics aspects of the implant-bone interface. In: Heimke G (ed). Dental Implants - Materials and Systems. Munich:Carl Hanser, 1980:111-123.
15. Berglundh T, Abrahamsson I, Lang NP, Lindhe J. De novo alveolar bone formation adjacent to endosseous implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003;14:251-262.
16. Cooper LF, Masuda T, Yliheikkilä PK, Felton DA. Generalizations regarding the process and phenomenon of osseointegration. Part II. In vitro studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:163-174.
17. Ziats NP, Miller KM, Anderson JM. In vitro and in vivo interactions of cells with biomaterials. Biomaterials 1988;9:5-13.
18. Puleo DA, Nanci A. Understanding and controlling the boneimplant interface. Biomaterials 1999;20:2311-2321.
19. Buser D, Schenk RK, Steinemann S, Fiorellini JP, Fox CH, Stich H. Influence of surface characteristics on bone integration of titanium implants. A histomorphometric study in miniature pigs. J Biomed Mater Res 1991;25:889-902.
20. Chehroudi B, McDonnell D, Brunette DM. The effects of micromachined surfaces on formation of bonelike tissue on subcutaneous implants as assessed by radiography and computer image processing. J Biomed Mater Res 1997;34:279-290.
21. Wennerberg A, Ektessabi A, Albrektsson T, Johansson C, Andersson B. A 1-year follow-up of implants of differing surface roughness placed in rabbit bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997;12:486-494.
22. Cochran DL, Buser D, ten Bruggenkate CM, et al.The use of reduced healing times on ITI implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) surface: Early results from clinical trials on ITI SLA implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:144-153.
23. 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.
24. Ivanoff CJ, Hallgren C, Widmark G, Sennerby L, Wennerberg A. Histologic evaluation of the bone integration of TiO(2) blasted and turned titanium microimplants in humans. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:128-134.
25. Ivanoff CJ, 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;18:341-348.
26. Klokkevold PR, Johnson P, Dadgostari S, Caputo A, Davies JE, Nishimura RD. Early endosseous integration enhanced by dual acid etching of titanium: A torque removal study in the rabbit. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:350-357.
27. Li D, Ferguson SJ, Beutler T, et al. Biomechanical comparison of the sandblasted and acid-etched and the machined and acidetched titanium surface for dental implants. J Biomed Mater Res 2002;60:325-332.
28. Rasmusson L, Kahnberg KE, Tan A. Effects of implant design and surface on bone regeneration and implant stability: An experimental study in the dog mandible. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2001;3:2-8.
29. Rønold HJ, Lyngstadaas SP, Ellingsen JE. A study on the effect of dual blasting with TiO2 on titanium implant surfaces on functional attachment in bone. J Biomed Mater Res 2003;67A(2):524-530.
30. Martin JY, Schwartz Z, Hummert TW, et al. Effect of titanium surface roughness on proliferation, differentiation, and protein synthesis of human osteoblast-like cells (MG63). J Biomed Mater Res 1995;29:389-401.
31. Boyan BD, Batzer R, Kieswetter K, et al.Titanium surface roughness alters responsiveness of MG63 osteoblast-like cells to 1 alpha,25-(OH)2D3. J Biomed Mater Res 1998;39:77-85.
32. 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.
33. Lumbikanonda N, Sammons R. Bone cell attachment to dental implants of different surface characteristics. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:627-636.
34. Helsingen AL, Lyberg T. Comparative surface analysis and clinical performance studies of Brånemark implants and related clones. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1994;9:422-430.
35. Jansen JA, van der Waerden JP Wolke JG. Histological and histomorphometrical evaluation of the bone reaction to three different titanium alloy and hydroxyapatite coated implants. J Appl Biomater 1993;4:213-219.
36. Caulier H, van der Waerden JP, Wolke JG, Kalk W, Naert I, Jansen JA. A histological and histomorphometrical evaluation of the application of screw-designed calciumphosphate (Ca-P)-coated implants in the cancellous maxillary bone of the goat. J Biomed Mater Res 1997;35:19-30.
37. Cooper LF. A role for surface topography in creating and maintaining bone at titanium endosseous implants. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:522-534.
38. Szmukler-Moncler S, Testori T, Bernard JP. Etched implants A comparative surface analysis of four implant systems. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2004 15;69:46-57.
39. Buser D, Broggini N, Wieland M, et al. Enhanced bone apposition to a chemically modified SLA titanium surface. J Dent Res 2004;83:529-533.
40. Morra M, Cassinelli C, Bruzzone G, et al. Surface chemistry effects of topographic modification of titanium dental implant surfaces: 1. Surface analysis. Int J Oral Maxiliofac Implants 2003;18:40-45.
41. Cassinelli C, Morra M, Bruzzone G, et al. Surface chemistry effects of topographic modification of titanium dental implant surfaces: 2. In vitro experiments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:46-52.
42. Perrin D, Szmukler-Moncler S, Echikou C, Pointaire P, Bernard JP. Bone response to alteration of surface topography and surface composition of sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:465-469.
43. Sul YT. The significance of the surface properties of oxidized titanium to the bone response: Special emphasis on potential biochemical bonding of oxidized titanium implant. Biomaterials 2003;24:3893-3907.
44. Novaes AB Jr, Souza SL, de Oliveira PT, Souza AM. Histomorphometric analysis of the bone-implant contact obtained with 4 different implant surface treatments placed side by side in the dog mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:377-383.
45. Cochran DL. A comparison of endosseous dental implant surfaces. J Periodontol 1999;70:1523-1539.
46. Suzuki K, Aoki K, Ohya K. Effects of surface roughness of titanium implants on bone remodeling activity of femur in rabbits. Bone 1997;21:507-514.
47. Brunski JB, Puleo DA, Nanci A. Biomaterials and biomechanics of oral and maxillofacial implants: Current status and future developments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:15-46.
48. Abrahamsson I, Zitzmann NU, Berglundh T, Wennerberg A, Lindhe J. Bone and soft tissue integration to titanium implants with different surface topography: An experimental study in the dog. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16: 323-332.
49. Romanes G, Toh C, Siar C, et al. Peri-Implant bone reactions to immediately loaded implants. An experimental study in monkeys. J Periodontol 2001;72:506-511.
50. Nkenke E, Lehner B, Weinzierl K, et al. Bone contact, growth and density around immediately loaded implants in the mandible of mini pigs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003;14:312-321