Journal
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH
Volume 31, Issue 2, Pages 192-200Publisher
WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/clr.13564
Keywords
bone substitute; dental implant; histology; implant surface; lesion; peri-implant disease; radiology; xenograft
Funding
- Swedish Research Council [VR: 2016-01571]
- TUA research funding, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Swedish Research Council [2016-01571] Funding Source: Swedish Research Council
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Objective To examine the progression of experimental peri-implantitis around different implants placed in augmented and pristine sites. Materials and Methods Six labrador dogs were used. Three months after tooth extraction, four implants with different surface modifications were installed on each side of the mandible. A standard osteotomy was applied on one side, while on the contralateral side the osteotomy was modified, resulting in a gap between the implant and the bone wall. The gap was filled with a bone substitute and covered by a resorbable membrane. Three months after implant installation, implants were exposed and healing abutments were connected. Two months later, oral hygiene procedures were abandoned and a cotton ligature was placed in a submarginal position around the neck of all implants and kept in place for 4 weeks. Following ligature removal, plaque formation continued for 6 months (spontaneous progression period). Radiographs were obtained throughout the experiment, and biopsies were collected and prepared for histological evaluation at the end of the spontaneous progression period. Results Differences in bone loss during the spontaneous progression period between pristine and augmented sites were small. The size and vertical dimension of the peri-implantitis lesion were larger at augmented than at pristine sites. Implants with non-modified surfaces exhibited smaller amounts of bone loss and smaller dimensions of peri-implantitis lesions than implants with modified surfaces. Conclusion Small differences in spontaneous progression of peri-implantitis were detected between pristine and augmented sites. Implants with modified surfaces exhibited more bone loss and larger lesions than implants with non-modified surfaces, irrespective of the type of surrounding bone.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available