Clinical oral implants research · 2015
In vivo evaluation of biofunctionalized implant surfaces with a synthetic peptide (P-15) and its impact on osseointegration. A preclinical animal study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schmitt Christian M, Koepple Markus, Moest Tobias, Neumann Konrad, Weisel Tamara, Schlegel Karl Andreas
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The overall aim of the study was to investigate a biofunctionalized implant surface with electrochemically deposition of hydroxyapatite and the synthetic peptide (P-15) and its effect on osseointegration.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three modified implant types of ANKYLOS® C/X implants were used; (1) machined implants used as negative control (M, n = 20), (2) implants with the FRIADENT® plus surface (grit blasted and acid-etched) used as positive control (P, n = 20), and (3) implants with a biomimetic surface consisting of hydroxyapatite and the synthetic 15 aminoacids containing peptide P-15 (BP, n = 40). The implants were randomly inserted in the mandibles of 10 beagle dogs following 4 months after tooth extraction (P1-P4). Three animals were sacrificed 2 and 7 days after implant insertion, respectively, and four animals were sacrificed 6 months post implant insertion. Bone-to-implant contacts (BICs) were analyzed via histomorphometrical analyses at five different region of interests (ROIs); two at the middle part on either side of the implant (ROI 1/4), two at the apical part of the implant at each side (ROI 2/3), and one at the tip of the implant (ROI 5).
RESULTS: All implant surfaces showed a high level of osseointegration and osteoconductivity. The cumulative implant survival rate (CSR) was 93.8%, 100% in the M, 85% in the P, and 95% in the BP group. No statistical difference in BICs at ROI 1/4, 2/3, and 5 could be shown between implant types following 2 and 7 days of healing. BIC values increased in all groups over time. After 6 months of healing the BP group showed superiority in BIC in ROI 2/3 (73.2 ± 15.6%) compared to the P (48.3 ± 10.6%) and M group (66.3 ± 30.2%) with a significant difference between BP and P (P = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: It is hypothesized, that the surface biofunctionalization improves peri-implant bone formation and remodeling, leading to an increased bone-to implant contact. However, within the limitations of the study set-up no benefit in the early phase of osseointegration could be established for dental implants with P-15 containing surface in this study.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three modified implant types of ANKYLOS® C/X implants were used; (1) machined implants used as negative control (M, n = 20), (2) implants with the FRIADENT® plus surface (grit blasted and acid-etched) used as positive control (P, n = 20), and (3) implants with a biomimetic surface consisting of hydroxyapatite and the synthetic 15 aminoacids containing peptide P-15 (BP, n = 40). The implants were randomly inserted in the mandibles of 10 beagle dogs following 4 months after tooth extraction (P1-P4). Three animals were sacrificed 2 and 7 days after implant insertion, respectively, and four animals were sacrificed 6 months post implant insertion. Bone-to-implant contacts (BICs) were analyzed via histomorphometrical analyses at five different region of interests (ROIs); two at the middle part on either side of the implant (ROI 1/4), two at the apical part of the implant at each side (ROI 2/3), and one at the tip of the implant (ROI 5).
RESULTS: All implant surfaces showed a high level of osseointegration and osteoconductivity. The cumulative implant survival rate (CSR) was 93.8%, 100% in the M, 85% in the P, and 95% in the BP group. No statistical difference in BICs at ROI 1/4, 2/3, and 5 could be shown between implant types following 2 and 7 days of healing. BIC values increased in all groups over time. After 6 months of healing the BP group showed superiority in BIC in ROI 2/3 (73.2 ± 15.6%) compared to the P (48.3 ± 10.6%) and M group (66.3 ± 30.2%) with a significant difference between BP and P (P = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: It is hypothesized, that the surface biofunctionalization improves peri-implant bone formation and remodeling, leading to an increased bone-to implant contact. However, within the limitations of the study set-up no benefit in the early phase of osseointegration could be established for dental implants with P-15 containing surface in this study.