hkr.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Effect of surface contamination on osseointegration of dental implants surrounded by circumferential bone defects
Dublin Dental School and Hospital, Division of Restorative Dentistry and Periodontology.
Dublin Dental School and Hospital, Division of Restorative Dentistry and Periodontology.
Kristianstad University, School of Health and Society. (Oral hälsa)ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0992-2362
Dublin Dental School and Hospital, Division of Restorative Dentistry and Periodontology.
2010 (English)In: Clinical Oral Implants Research, ISSN 0905-7161, E-ISSN 1600-0501, Vol. 21, no 5, 513-519 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective This study was designed to evaluate the effect of surface contamination on osseointegration of dental implants surrounded by a circumferential bone defect and to compare osseointegration around Osseotite (R) with that around Nanotite (TM) implants. Materials and methods The premolars on both sides of the mandible in four beagle dogs were extracted. Following 4 months healing, two Nanotite (TM) implants and two Osseotite (R) implants were partially inserted in the left side of each mandible. Some threads protruded from the tissues into the oral cavity. Following a 5 week healing period, the implants were removed and the contaminated part of each implant was cleaned. They were then installed to the full implant length on the contra lateral side of the mandibles. The coronal 5 mm of each implant was surrounded by 1 mm circumferential bone defect. Following 12 weeks of healing period, the dogs were sacrificed and biopsies were obtained. Ground sections were prepared for histomorphometric analysis. Results All implants were associated with direct bone-to-implant contact on the portion of the implant surface contaminated previously and surrounded by bone defect. Nanotite (TM) implants performed better than Osseotite (R) implants. Conclusions The results demonstrated that implant surfaces, which were contaminated previously and were surrounded by bone defects, can osseointegrate. To cite this article:Mohamed S, Polyzois I, Renvert S, Claffey N. Effect of surface contamination on osseointegration of dental implants surrounded by circumferential bone defects.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. Vol. 21, no 5, 513-519 p.
Keyword [en]
animal experiments, bone-implant interactions, wound healing, experimental peri-implantitis, re-osseointegration, surgical-treatment, dog, periimplantitis, regeneration
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hkr:diva-7529ISI: 000276467600008PubMedID: 20443803OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hkr-7529DiVA: diva2:380428
Available from: 2010-12-21 Created: 2010-12-20 Last updated: 2014-05-28Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

PubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Renvert, Stefan
By organisation
School of Health and Society
In the same journal
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 50 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf