Health & Environmental Research Online (HERO)


Print Feedback Export to File
3160382 
Journal Article 
Influence of surface treatment on osseointegration of dental implants: histological, histomorphometric and radiological analysis in vivo 
Calvo-Guirado, JL; Satorres-Nieto, M; Aguilar-Salvatierra, A; Delgado-Ruiz, RA; Maté-Sánchez de Val, JE; Gargallo-Albiol, J; Gómez-Moreno, G; Romanos, GE 
2015 
Yes 
Clinical Oral Investigations
ISSN: 1432-6981
EISSN: 1436-3771 
19 
2 
509-517 
English 
24737100 
has retraction 3160382 Influence of surface treatment on osseointegration of dental implants: histological, histomorphometric and radiological analysis in vivo
is retraction of 3160382 Influence of surface treatment on osseointegration of dental implants: histological, histomorphometric and radiological analysis in vivo
has retraction 11901098 Correction to:
has retraction 11920918 (Retraction of pg 509, 2015)
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article is to compare the influence of surface treatment on the integration (at 2, 4 and 8 weeks) of 120 dental implants inserted in 60 tibiae of rabbits.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four different surfaces were double-blind tested: blasted, acid-etched and discrete crystal deposition (DCD) (group A); blasted (group B); acid-etched (group C) and blasted and acid-etched (group D). Bone-to-implant contact plus reverse torque and bone level were measured at the time of implant insertion and at 14, 28 and 56 days of healing.

RESULTS: Group A showed the highest early and late bone-to-implant contact (BIC) values: 40.8 ± 2.3 % at 14 days decreasing to 27.7 ± 1.1 % after 28 days and 39.4 ± 1.4 % at 56 days. For group B, the average BIC values at 14, 28 and 56 days were 23.34 ± 2.1, 23.77 ± 1.9 and 29.47 ± 1.7 %, respectively. Group C showed a value of 25.72 ± 2.3 % after 14 days of integration, 34.92 ± 2.2 % at 28 days and 32.91 ± 1.6 % at 56 days. Group D showed a BIC value of 32 ± 2.5 % at 14 days, 32.85 ± 1.4 % at 28 days and 34.04 ± 2.3 % at 56 days. In the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis, no statistically significant differences were found. The Ca/P ratio values were 1.762 for surface A, 1.625 for surface B, 1.663 for surface C and finally 1.722 for surface D.

CONCLUSIONS: Therefore, we conclude that even if there seems to be a tendency to obtain better BIC results with surface A (blasted-etched and covered with hydroxyapatite (HA)), no statistical differences were obtained in this study.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The study shows the influence of different implant surfaces in increasing osseointegation for immediate loading implants.