Cargando…

A Narrative Review of the Histological and Histomorphometrical Evaluation of the Peri-Implant Bone in Loaded and Unloaded Dental Implants. A 30-Year Experience (1988–2018)

Background: The aim of the present review was to assess the histological and histomorphometrical data from the paper published by our Laboratory on peri-implant bone in dental implants in different loading conditions. Methods: The papers published in different implant loading conditions, in dental i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tumedei, Margherita, Piattelli, Adriano, Degidi, Marco, Mangano, Carlo, Iezzi, Giovanna
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7143607/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32245226
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17062088
Descripción
Sumario:Background: The aim of the present review was to assess the histological and histomorphometrical data from the paper published by our Laboratory on peri-implant bone in dental implants in different loading conditions. Methods: The papers published in different implant loading conditions, in dental implants retrieved from humans, and in the Hard Tissues Research Center of the University of Chieti-Pescara, Italy, were screened on MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and other electronic databases until 31 December 2018. Only articles that reported the histological and histomorphometrical values of the Bone-Implant Contact (BIC) were selected. Results: The system selection provided a total of 155 papers. The manuscripts included for the narrative review were 57. These papers provided histological and histomorphometrical data. Conclusions: The bone remodeling around dental implants was found to be a dynamic process; loading changed the microstructure of the peri-implant bone; and implants were found to provide a successful function, over several decades, with different range of degrees of BIC in vivo (varying from a little more than 30% to a little more than 90%). Loaded implants presented a 10%–12% higher BIC values when compared to submerged, unloaded implants, and rougher surfaces had, on average, about a 10% higher BIC than machined surfaces.