4.4 Article

Micro-architecture and mineralization of the human alveolar bone obtained with microCT

期刊

ARCHIVES OF ORAL BIOLOGY
卷 58, 期 6, 页码 621-627

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2012.10.001

关键词

Alveolar process; Cadaver; Bone morphology; Micro computed tomography

资金

  1. ACTA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: The primary dental implant stability depends on the location of the implant in the jaw. This study analysed the architecture and mineralization of the trabecular bone at different jaw locations and thereby identified potential prognostic factors for implant failure. It has checked the hypotheses: (1) the mandible contains more compact and less mineralized trabecular bone than the maxilla and (2) within the mandible the trabecular bone is more compact and less mineralized in the anterior region. Methods: Alveolar bone specimens were produced from the cadavers of ten humans (7 males and 3 females; mean age: 73.7 +/- 12.5 years) and scanned with a high-resolution microCT system. Volumes of interest were chosen next to the roots of molars and incisors in both the maxilla and mandible. Several morphological parameters as well as the tissue mineral density were determined. Results: The alveolar bone specimens had a very high bone volume fraction (mean = 0.31) with large differences (SD = 0.17) between and within subjects. Yet several significant differences were found between the maxilla and the mandible. The bone volume fraction and trabecular thickness were significantly higher in the mandible than in the maxilla (p < 0.01). But the tissue mineral density was not significantly different. Conclusions: A higher primary implant stability coincides with a higher bone volume fraction and degree of anisotropy Although local differences remain more important for implantology, the results suggest that the micro-structure also affects the implant stability. The tissue mineral density seems to have no predictive value. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据