Early bone formation adjacent to rough and turned endosseous implant surfaces. An experimental study in the dog.

OBJECTIVE To validate a proposed model (Berglundh et al. 2003) and to evaluate the rate and degree of osseointegration at turned (T) and sand blasted and acid etched (SLA) implant surfaces during early phases of healing. MATERIAL AND METHODS The devices used for the study of early healing had a geometry that corresponded to that of a solid screw implant with either a SLA or a T surface configuration. A circumferential trough had been prepared within the thread region (intra-osseous portion) that established a geometrically well-defined wound chamber. Twenty Labrador dogs received totally 160 experimental devices to allow the evaluation of healing between 2 h and 12 weeks. Both ground and decalcified sections were prepared from mesial/distal and buccal/lingual device sites. Histometric and morphometric analyses of the ground sections and morphometric analysis of the tissue components in decalcified sections were performed. RESULTS The ground sections provided an overview of the various phases of tissue formation, while the decalcified, thin sections enabled a more detailed study of events involved in bone tissue modeling and remodeling for both SLA and T surfaces. The initially empty wound chamber became occupied with a coagulum and a granulation tissue that was replaced by a provisional matrix. The process of bone formation started already during the first week. The newly formed bone present at the lateral border of the cut bony bed appeared to be continuous with the parent bone, but on the SLA surface woven bone was also found at a distance from the parent bone. Parallel-fibered and/or lamellar bone as well as bone marrow replaced this primary bone after 4 weeks. In the SLA chambers, more bone-to-device contact, more initial woven bone and earlier lamellar bone formation was found than in the T chambers. CONCLUSION Osseointegration represents a dynamic process both during its establishment and its maintenance. While healing showed similar characteristics with resorptive and appositional events for both SLA and T surfaces, the rate and degree of osseointegration were superior for the SLA compared with the T chambers.

[1]  J. Lindhe,et al.  Dynamics of bone tissue formation in tooth extraction sites. An experimental study in dogs. , 2003, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[2]  Niklaus P Lang,et al.  De novo alveolar bone formation adjacent to endosseous implants. , 2003, Clinical oral implants research.

[3]  J. Lindhe,et al.  The jumping distance revisited: An experimental study in the dog. , 2003, Clinical oral implants research.

[4]  J. Lindhe,et al.  Appositional bone formation in marginal defects at implants. , 2003, Clinical oral implants research.

[5]  A. Wennerberg,et al.  Bone and soft tissue integration to titanium implants with different surface topography: an experimental study in the dog. , 2001, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[6]  D Buser,et al.  Bone response to unloaded and loaded titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a histometric study in the canine mandible. , 1998, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[7]  J. Lindhe,et al.  GTR treatment of degree III furcation defects with 2 different resorbable barriers. An experimental study in dogs. , 1998, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[8]  J. Davies,et al.  Mechanisms of endosseous integration. , 1998, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[9]  J. Lindhe,et al.  On the dynamics of periodontal tissue formation in degree III furcation defects. An experimental study in dogs. , 1997, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[10]  D. Cochran,et al.  Evaluation of an endosseous titanium implant with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface in the canine mandible: radiographic results. , 1996, Clinical oral implants research.

[11]  N. Lang,et al.  A novel model system for the study of experimental guided bone formation in humans. , 1996, Clinical oral implants research.

[12]  Ann Wennerberg,et al.  A histomorghometric study of screw‐shaped and removal torque titanium implants with three different surface topographies , 1995 .

[13]  T. Karring,et al.  Formation of jawbone tuberosities by guided tissue regeneration. An experimental study in the rat. , 1994, Clinical oral implants research.

[14]  T. Karring,et al.  Augmentation of the rat mandible using guided tissue regeneration. , 1994, Clinical oral implants research.

[15]  J. Lindhe,et al.  The topography of the vascular systems in the periodontal and peri-implant tissues in the dog. , 1994, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[16]  D. Buser,et al.  Healing pattern of bone regeneration in membrane-protected defects: a histologic study in the canine mandible. , 1994, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[17]  D Buser,et al.  Influence of surface characteristics on bone integration of titanium implants. A histomorphometric study in miniature pigs. , 1991, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[18]  P. Thomsen,et al.  The soft tissue barrier at implants and teeth. , 1991, Clinical oral implants research.

[19]  K. Donath,et al.  A method for the study of undecalcified bones and teeth with attached soft tissues. The Säge-Schliff (sawing and grinding) technique. , 1982, Journal of oral pathology.

[20]  H. Schroeder,et al.  Morphometric model, tissue sampling and test of stereologic procedures , 1973, Journal of microscopy.

[21]  M H Amler,et al.  The time sequence of tissue regeneration in human extraction wounds. , 1969, Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology.