10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Influence of Bone-Level Dental Implants Placement and of Cortical Thickness on Osseointegration: In Silico and In Vivo Analyses

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The purpose of this research is to study the biomechanical response of dental implants in bone-level type locations, 0.5 mm above and below the bone level. In addition, the influence of the thickness of the cortical bone on osseointegration is determined due to the mechanical loads transfer from the dental implant to the cortical and trabecular bone. The thicknesses studied were 1.5 mm and 2.5 mm. Numerical simulations were performed using a finite element method (FEM)-based model. In order to verify the FEM model, the in silico results were compared with the results obtained from a histological analysis performed in an in vivo study with 30 New Zealand rabbits. FEM was performed using a computerized 3D model of bone-level dental implants inserted in the lower jawbone with an applied axial load of 100 N. The analysis was performed using different distances from the bone level and different thicknesses of cortical bone. The interface area of bone growth was evaluated by analyzing the bone–implant contact (BIC), region of interest (ROI) and total bone area (BAT) parameters obtained through an in vivo histological process and analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Bone-level implants were inserted in the rabbit tibiae, with two implants placed per tibia. These parameters were evaluated after three or six weeks of implantation. FEM studies showed that placements 0.5 mm below the bone level presented lower values of stress distribution compared to the other studied placements. The lower levels of mechanical stress were then correlated with the in vivo studies, showing that this position presented the highest BIC value after three or six weeks of implantation. In this placement, vertical bone growth could be observed up the bone level. The smallest thickness of the study showed a better transfer of mechanical loads, which leads to a better osseointegration. In silico and in vivo results both concluded that the implants placed 0.5 mm below the cortical bone and with lower thicknesses presented the best biomechanical and histological behavior in terms of new bone formation, enhanced mechanical stability and optimum osseointegration.

          Related collections

          Most cited references64

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Tissue integration of non-submerged implants. 1-year results of a prospective study with 100 ITI hollow-cylinder and hollow-screw implants.

            It has been postulated that the wound healing in a closed submerged location is one of the prerequisites for osseointegration of dental implants. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the tissue integration of intentionally non-submerged titanium implants inserted by a one-stage surgical procedure. 100 ITI implants were consecutively placed in 70 partially edentulous patients. After a healing period free of masticatory loading for at least 3 months, the implants were examined. The clinical status showed for all implants neither detectable mobility nor signs of a peri-implant infection. Therefore, prosthetic abutments were inserted, and the patients were restored with fixed partial dentures. All patients were regularly recalled at 3-month intervals, and no patient dropped out of the study. Thus, all 100 implants were re-evaluated 12 months following implantation. Plaque- and sulcus bleeding indices, probing depth, clinical attachment level, width of keratinized mucosa, and periotest scores were assessed. In addition, standardized radiographs were analyzed for the presence of peri-implant radiolucencies and for the location of alveolar bone levels around the implants. Based on predefined criteria, the implants were classified as successful or failing. 98 implants were considered successful, and 1 implant failing. The remaining implant exhibited a peri-implant infection requiring local and systemic antimicrobial treatment. The results of this short-term study indicate that intentionally non-submerged ITI implants yield a high predictability for successful tissue integration.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Role of primary stability for successful osseointegration of dental implants: Factors of influence and evaluation.

              A secure implant primary (mechanical) stability is positively associated with a successful implant integration and long-term successful clinical outcome. Therefore, it is essential to assess the initial stability at different time-points to ensure a successful osseointegration. The present study critically reviews the factors that may play a role in achieving a successful initial stability in dental implants. Databases were searched from 1983 up to and including October 2013 using different combinations of various keywords. Bone quality and quantity, implant geometry, and surgical technique adopted may significantly influence primary stability and overall success rate of dental implants.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                JCMOHK
                Journal of Clinical Medicine
                JCM
                MDPI AG
                2077-0383
                February 2022
                February 16 2022
                : 11
                : 4
                : 1027
                Article
                10.3390/jcm11041027
                35207298
                8a59abdf-66b5-47b4-ae08-68cb2de3cd7a
                © 2022

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article