The three-dimensional bone interface of an osseointegrated implant. I: A morphometric evaluation in initial healing.

Direct bone-implant interface as an indicator of endosseous implant success appears to have been overinterpreted because 100% bone apposition is not necessarily obtained at the surface of the endosseous dental implant. The purpose of this study was to obtain quantitative information about the three-dimensional bone structure around three hydroxyapatite-coated titanium alloy dental implants. Implants were placed in the mandible in three monkeys, and the surface bone contact ratio in the buccal, lingual, mesial, and distal directions was computed. Computer graphics were generated by the integration of data for serial ground surfaces obtained at 75 microm intervals of the tissue block involved with the implant. The bone contact ratio of the whole surface of each of the three implants was 80.8%, 68.1%, and 68.8%, and the bone contact ratio for each direction and portion varied with the conditions of implant placement. The bone volume ratios around the implant at the 0 to 300 microm zone were also calculated, and total ratios ranged from 58% to 81%. These results may provide useful quantitative information about the bone structure around the hydroxyapatite-coated implants and contribute to the development of realistic finite element analysis models based on the biologic bone structure around the implants.

[1]  H Tsuru,et al.  The three-dimensional bone interface of an osseointegrated implant: a method for study. , 1992, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[2]  Block Ms,et al.  What is osseointegration , 1987 .

[3]  P. Branemark,et al.  Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. , 1977, Scandinavian journal of plastic and reconstructive surgery. Supplementum.

[4]  R. Pilliar,et al.  A Histological Assessment of the Initial Healing Response Adjacent to Porous-surfaced, Titanium Alloy Dental Implants in Dogs , 1986, Journal of dental research.

[5]  L Sennerby,et al.  A morphometric and biomechanic comparison of titanium implants inserted in rabbit cortical and cancellous bone. , 1992, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[6]  P I Brånemark,et al.  A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. , 1981, International journal of oral surgery.

[7]  K. Hayashi,et al.  Quantitative analysis of in vivo tissue responses to titanium-oxide- and hydroxyapatite-coated titanium alloy. , 1991, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[8]  H. Tsuru,et al.  The effects of early occlusal loading on one-stage titanium alloy implants in beagle dogs: a pilot study. , 1993, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[9]  H. Tsuru,et al.  Initial interface between submerged hydroxyapatite-coated titanium alloy implant and mandibular bone after nontapping and tapping insertions in monkeys. , 1990, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[10]  T. V. Van Dyke,et al.  Evaluation of titanium dental implant osseointegration in posterior edentulous areas of micro swine. , 1991, The Journal of oral implantology.

[11]  P. Watson,et al.  A Histological Comparison in the Dog of Porous-coated vs. Threaded Dental Implants , 1990, Journal of dental research.

[12]  H. Tsuru,et al.  Bone-implant interface structures after nontapping and tapping insertion of screw-type titanium alloy endosseous implants. , 1988, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[13]  J. Beumer,et al.  Histomorphometry of bone apposition around three types of endosseous dental implants. , 1992, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.