Effect of surface contamination on osseointegration of dental implants surrounded by circumferential bone defects.

Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/124291
Title:
Effect of surface contamination on osseointegration of dental implants surrounded by circumferential bone defects.
Authors:
Mohamed, Seif; Polyzois, Ioannis; Renvert, Stefan; Claffey, Noel
Affiliation:
Dublin Dental School and Hospital, Division of Restorative Dentistry and Periodontology, Dublin, Ireland.
Citation:
Effect of surface contamination on osseointegration of dental implants surrounded by circumferential bone defects. 2010, 21 (5):513-9 Clin Oral Implants Res
Journal:
Clinical oral implants research
Issue Date:
May-2010
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/124291
DOI:
10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01913.x
PubMed ID:
20443803
Abstract:
This study was designed to evaluate the effect of surface contamination on osseointegration of dental implants surrounded by a circumferential bone defect and to compare osseointegration around Osseotite with that around Nanotite implants.; The premolars on both sides of the mandible in four beagle dogs were extracted. Following 4 months healing, two Nanotite implants and two Osseotite implants were partially inserted in the left side of each mandible. Some threads protruded from the tissues into the oral cavity. Following a 5 week healing period, the implants were removed and the contaminated part of each implant was cleaned. They were then installed to the full implant length on the contra lateral side of the mandibles. The coronal 5 mm of each implant was surrounded by 1 mm circumferential bone defect. Following 12 weeks of healing period, the dogs were sacrificed and biopsies were obtained. Ground sections were prepared for histomorphometric analysis.; All implants were associated with direct bone-to-implant contact on the portion of the implant surface contaminated previously and surrounded by bone defect. Nanotite implants performed better than Osseotite implants.; The results demonstrated that implant surfaces, which were contaminated previously and were surrounded by bone defects, can osseointegrate.
Item Type:
Article
Language:
en
MeSH:
Animals; Bicuspid; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Plaque; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dogs; Mandible; Osseointegration; Osteotomy; Surface Properties; Surgical Flaps
ISSN:
1600-0501

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorMohamed, Seifen
dc.contributor.authorPolyzois, Ioannisen
dc.contributor.authorRenvert, Stefanen
dc.contributor.authorClaffey, Noelen
dc.date.accessioned2011-03-11T16:42:27Z-
dc.date.available2011-03-11T16:42:27Z-
dc.date.issued2010-05-
dc.identifier.citationEffect of surface contamination on osseointegration of dental implants surrounded by circumferential bone defects. 2010, 21 (5):513-9 Clin Oral Implants Resen
dc.identifier.issn1600-0501-
dc.identifier.pmid20443803-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01913.x-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10147/124291-
dc.description.abstractThis study was designed to evaluate the effect of surface contamination on osseointegration of dental implants surrounded by a circumferential bone defect and to compare osseointegration around Osseotite with that around Nanotite implants.-
dc.description.abstractThe premolars on both sides of the mandible in four beagle dogs were extracted. Following 4 months healing, two Nanotite implants and two Osseotite implants were partially inserted in the left side of each mandible. Some threads protruded from the tissues into the oral cavity. Following a 5 week healing period, the implants were removed and the contaminated part of each implant was cleaned. They were then installed to the full implant length on the contra lateral side of the mandibles. The coronal 5 mm of each implant was surrounded by 1 mm circumferential bone defect. Following 12 weeks of healing period, the dogs were sacrificed and biopsies were obtained. Ground sections were prepared for histomorphometric analysis.-
dc.description.abstractAll implants were associated with direct bone-to-implant contact on the portion of the implant surface contaminated previously and surrounded by bone defect. Nanotite implants performed better than Osseotite implants.-
dc.description.abstractThe results demonstrated that implant surfaces, which were contaminated previously and were surrounded by bone defects, can osseointegrate.-
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subject.meshAnimals-
dc.subject.meshBicuspid-
dc.subject.meshDental Implantation, Endosseous-
dc.subject.meshDental Implants-
dc.subject.meshDental Plaque-
dc.subject.meshDental Prosthesis Design-
dc.subject.meshDogs-
dc.subject.meshMandible-
dc.subject.meshOsseointegration-
dc.subject.meshOsteotomy-
dc.subject.meshSurface Properties-
dc.subject.meshSurgical Flaps-
dc.titleEffect of surface contamination on osseointegration of dental implants surrounded by circumferential bone defects.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentDublin Dental School and Hospital, Division of Restorative Dentistry and Periodontology, Dublin, Ireland.en
dc.identifier.journalClinical oral implants researchen
dc.description.provinceLeinster-

Related articles on PubMed

All Items in Lenus, The Irish Health Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.