Cargando…
Surface characterization and in vivo evaluation of laser sintered and machined implants followed by resorbable-blasting media process: A study in sheep
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the histomorphometric and histological bone response to laser-sintered implants followed by resorbable-blasting media (RBM) process relative to standard machined/RBM surface treated implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six male sheep (n=6) received 2 Ti-6Al-4V impl...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medicina Oral S.L.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4788801/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26827064 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.20946 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the histomorphometric and histological bone response to laser-sintered implants followed by resorbable-blasting media (RBM) process relative to standard machined/RBM surface treated implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six male sheep (n=6) received 2 Ti-6Al-4V implants (1 per surface) in each side of the mandible for 6 weeks in vivo. The histomorphometric parameters bone-implant contact (BIC) and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO) were evaluated. RESULTS: Optical interferometry revealed higher Sa and Sq values for the laser-sintered/RBM surface in relation to standard/RBM implants. No significant differences in BIC were observed between the two groups (p>0.2), but significantly higher BAFO was observed for standard/RBM implants (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrated that both surfaces were biocompatible and osseoconductive, and the combination of laser sintering and RBM has no advantage over the standard machined implants with subsequent RBM. Key words:Dental implants, osseointegration, resorbable- blasting media, sheep, in vivo. |
---|