Cargando…

Influence of Implant Neck Design on Peri-Implant Tissue Dimensions: A Comparative Study in Dogs

This in vivo study assessed (hard and soft) peri-implant tissue remodeling around implants with micro-ring and open-thread neck designs placed in a dog model. Twenty histological sections corresponding to four different implant designs that were placed in America Foxhound dogs were obtained from pre...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Calvo-Guirado, José Luis, Jiménez-Soto, Raúl, Pérez Albacete-Martínez, Carlos, Fernández-Domínguez, Manuel, Gehrke, Sérgio Alexandre, Maté-Sánchez de Val, José Eduardo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6212799/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30336579
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma11102007
_version_ 1783367621973901312
author Calvo-Guirado, José Luis
Jiménez-Soto, Raúl
Pérez Albacete-Martínez, Carlos
Fernández-Domínguez, Manuel
Gehrke, Sérgio Alexandre
Maté-Sánchez de Val, José Eduardo
author_facet Calvo-Guirado, José Luis
Jiménez-Soto, Raúl
Pérez Albacete-Martínez, Carlos
Fernández-Domínguez, Manuel
Gehrke, Sérgio Alexandre
Maté-Sánchez de Val, José Eduardo
author_sort Calvo-Guirado, José Luis
collection PubMed
description This in vivo study assessed (hard and soft) peri-implant tissue remodeling around implants with micro-ring and open-thread neck designs placed in a dog model. Twenty histological sections corresponding to four different implant designs that were placed in America Foxhound dogs were obtained from previous studies. All the implants had been placed under identical conditions and were divided into four groups: Group A, micro-rings on implant neck plus 0.5 mm refined surface; Group B, micro-rings on implant neck; Group C, open-thread neck; and, Group D, double-spiral neck. Eight weeks after surgery, the integrated implants were removed and processed for histological examination. Crestal bone loss and bone-to-implant contact was greater for micro-ring necks than open-thread necks. Soft tissues showed significant differences on both buccal and lingual aspects, so that the distance from peri-implant mucosa to the apical portion of the barrier epithelium was smaller in the micro-ring groups. So, in spite of generating greater bone-to-implant contact, implants with micro rings produced more bone loss than open-thread implants. Moreover, the outcomes that were obtained IPX implants smooth neck design produced less bone loss in the cervical area, following by Facility implants when compared with the other open thread and microthreaded implant designs. Implant thread design can influence on bone remodeling in the cervical area, related to bundle bone preservation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6212799
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62127992018-11-14 Influence of Implant Neck Design on Peri-Implant Tissue Dimensions: A Comparative Study in Dogs Calvo-Guirado, José Luis Jiménez-Soto, Raúl Pérez Albacete-Martínez, Carlos Fernández-Domínguez, Manuel Gehrke, Sérgio Alexandre Maté-Sánchez de Val, José Eduardo Materials (Basel) Article This in vivo study assessed (hard and soft) peri-implant tissue remodeling around implants with micro-ring and open-thread neck designs placed in a dog model. Twenty histological sections corresponding to four different implant designs that were placed in America Foxhound dogs were obtained from previous studies. All the implants had been placed under identical conditions and were divided into four groups: Group A, micro-rings on implant neck plus 0.5 mm refined surface; Group B, micro-rings on implant neck; Group C, open-thread neck; and, Group D, double-spiral neck. Eight weeks after surgery, the integrated implants were removed and processed for histological examination. Crestal bone loss and bone-to-implant contact was greater for micro-ring necks than open-thread necks. Soft tissues showed significant differences on both buccal and lingual aspects, so that the distance from peri-implant mucosa to the apical portion of the barrier epithelium was smaller in the micro-ring groups. So, in spite of generating greater bone-to-implant contact, implants with micro rings produced more bone loss than open-thread implants. Moreover, the outcomes that were obtained IPX implants smooth neck design produced less bone loss in the cervical area, following by Facility implants when compared with the other open thread and microthreaded implant designs. Implant thread design can influence on bone remodeling in the cervical area, related to bundle bone preservation. MDPI 2018-10-17 /pmc/articles/PMC6212799/ /pubmed/30336579 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma11102007 Text en © 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Calvo-Guirado, José Luis
Jiménez-Soto, Raúl
Pérez Albacete-Martínez, Carlos
Fernández-Domínguez, Manuel
Gehrke, Sérgio Alexandre
Maté-Sánchez de Val, José Eduardo
Influence of Implant Neck Design on Peri-Implant Tissue Dimensions: A Comparative Study in Dogs
title Influence of Implant Neck Design on Peri-Implant Tissue Dimensions: A Comparative Study in Dogs
title_full Influence of Implant Neck Design on Peri-Implant Tissue Dimensions: A Comparative Study in Dogs
title_fullStr Influence of Implant Neck Design on Peri-Implant Tissue Dimensions: A Comparative Study in Dogs
title_full_unstemmed Influence of Implant Neck Design on Peri-Implant Tissue Dimensions: A Comparative Study in Dogs
title_short Influence of Implant Neck Design on Peri-Implant Tissue Dimensions: A Comparative Study in Dogs
title_sort influence of implant neck design on peri-implant tissue dimensions: a comparative study in dogs
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6212799/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30336579
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma11102007
work_keys_str_mv AT calvoguiradojoseluis influenceofimplantneckdesignonperiimplanttissuedimensionsacomparativestudyindogs
AT jimenezsotoraul influenceofimplantneckdesignonperiimplanttissuedimensionsacomparativestudyindogs
AT perezalbacetemartinezcarlos influenceofimplantneckdesignonperiimplanttissuedimensionsacomparativestudyindogs
AT fernandezdominguezmanuel influenceofimplantneckdesignonperiimplanttissuedimensionsacomparativestudyindogs
AT gehrkesergioalexandre influenceofimplantneckdesignonperiimplanttissuedimensionsacomparativestudyindogs
AT matesanchezdevaljoseeduardo influenceofimplantneckdesignonperiimplanttissuedimensionsacomparativestudyindogs