The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지

THE EFFECT OF PERMANENT MAGNET CONNECTING WITH DENTAL IMPLANT ON DISTRIBUTION AND ATTACHMENT OF OSTEOBLAST-LIKE CELL AROUND THE DENTAL IMPLANT

임플랜트에 연결한 영구자석이 임플랜트 주위 뼈모세포의 분포와 부착에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구

  • Oh Na-Hee (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Kyung-Hee University) ;
  • Choi Boo-Byung (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Kyung-Hee University) ;
  • Kwon Kung-Rock (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Kyung-Hee University) ;
  • Baik Jin (Departmnt of Dentistry, Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Lee Sung-Bok (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Kyung-Hee University)
  • 오나희 (경희대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 최부병 (경희대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 권긍록 (경희대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 백진 (서울아산병원 치과) ;
  • 이성복 (경희대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실)
  • Published : 2005.08.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to find the effect of rare earth magnet's magnetic field of to the osteoblast around the implant by the means of observation number, and distribution around the implant which is connected to the permanent magnet but not, counted and compared by the number of cells attached to the surface of the implant. Material and method: The permanent magnets, made in the healing cap form, were connected to the implant future, and placed on the culture plate, The osteoblast-like cell: MC3T3-E1 were used for cell culture. As the control group, the implant were connected to normal healing cap, and cultured in the same conditions. 48 hours later, using inverted microscope, the number and distribution of osteoblast around the implant were observed, and 72 hours later, the number of the cells attached to the implant were counted. Results: As a result, the implant connected to the permanent magnet had proved to have a more concentrated cell distribution rate than the control group. The implant connected to the permanent magnet, neck area : which has about 10 gauss magnetic force, had more cells than apex area. The implant connected to the permanent magnet had proven to attach to the osteoblast more productively than control group's implant. Conclusions: This research showed that the magnetic field of the permanent magnet affected the distribution and growth rate of the osteoblast around the implant. In order to support this study, it also had need to monitor the progress of the permanent magnet specifically shown on the neck area, which has10 gauss magnetic force. So after additional research on the distribution and attachment of the cells, and further more, on bone formation, it will be concluded that the clinical applications ,such as immediate loading of implant treatment are possible.

Keywords

References

  1. Yasuda I. Fukuda E. On the piezoelectric effect of bone. J Physiol Soc Japan 1957: 12: 121-128
  2. Korenstein R. Somjen D, Fischer H, Binderman I. Capacitative pulsed electric stimulation of bone cell. Induction of cyclic-AMP and DNA synthesis. Biochem Biophys Acta 1984: 803: 302-307 https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-4889(84)90121-6
  3. Bodamyali T, Bhatt B, Hughes FJ, Winrow VR, Kanczler JM, Abbott J, Blake DR, Stevens CR. Pulsed electricmagnetic fields simultaneously induce osteogenesis and upregulated transcription of bone morphogenic proteins 2 and 4 in rat osteoblast in vitro. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 1998: 250: 458-461 https://doi.org/10.1006/bbrc.1998.9243
  4. McDonald F. Effect of static magnetic fields on osteoblasts and fibroblasts in vitro. Bioelectromagnetics 1993: 14: 187-196 https://doi.org/10.1002/bem.2250140302
  5. Bassett CA, Pawluk RJ, Pilla AA. Augmentation of bone repair by inductively coupled electromagnetic fields. Science 1974:184:575-577 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.184.4136.575
  6. Jacobs JD, Norton LA. Electrical stimulation of osteogenesis in pathological osseos defects. J Periodontol 1976:47:311-319 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1976.47.6.311
  7. Kawata T, Hirota K, Sumitani K. A new orthodontic force system of magneitc brakets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1987:92:241-248 https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(87)90418-5
  8. Yasuda I. Nagayama H, Kato T, et al. Fundamental problems in the theatment of fracture. J Kyoto Med Soc 1953:4:395-406
  9. Yasuda I. Piezoelectricity of living bone. J Kyoto Pref Univ Med 1953: 53: 325
  10. Friedenberg ZG, Robert PG, Didizian NH, Brighton CT. Stimulation of fracture healing by direct current in the rabbit fibula. J Bone Joint Surg 1971: 53A: 1400-1408
  11. Cieszynski Y. Studies on the regeneration of ossal tissue. II. Treatment of bone fracture in experimental animals with electric energy. Arch Immunol Ther Exp 1963: 11: 199-217
  12. Bassett CA, Pawluk RJ. Noninvasive method for stimulating osteogenesis. J Biomed Mater Res 1975:9:371-374 https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820090312
  13. Stan S. Sansen W. Muline JC. Experimental study on the electrical impendance of bone and the effect of direct current on the healing of fracture. Clin Orthop 1976: 120: 264-267
  14. Smith SD. Effect of electrode placement on stimulation of adult frog limb regeneration. Ann NY Scad Sci 1974:238:500-507 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1974.tb26816.x
  15. Becker RO. Electrical osteogenesis-pro and con. CalcifTissue Res 1978:26:93-97 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02013241
  16. Kubato K. Effect of electrical currents of alveolar bone defects. J Kyushu Dent Soc 1982:36:64-81
  17. Karaki R. Experimental study of internal remodeling and callus formation in mandible by electrical stimulation. J Kyushu Dent Soc 1979:32:590-608 https://doi.org/10.2504/kds.32.590
  18. Takahashi H. The effects of microelectric current on internal remodeling of bone. Orthop Res Sci 1980: 7 : 517 -527
  19. Inoue S. Ohashi S, Kajikawa K. et al. The effects of electric stimulation on the differentiation to the bone. Orthop Res Sci 1980:7:501-507
  20. Matsunaga S. Sakou T. Yoshikuni N. et al. Intramedullary callus induced by weak direct current stimulation: Serial changes in the alkaline phosphatase activity at the site of electricity induced callus formation. J Japan Bioelect Res Soc 1988:2:67-71
  21. Esformes I. Kummer FJ, Livelli TJ. Biological effects of magnetic fields generated with CoSm magnets. Bull Hosp Jt Orthop lnst 1981:41:81-87
  22. Sato K, Yanaguchi H, Miyamoto H, Kinouchi Y. Growth of human cultured cells exposed to a non-homogenous atatic magnetic field generated by Sm-Co magnets. Biochim Biophys Acta 1992: 1136: 231-238 https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-4889(92)90111-N
  23. Camilleri S, McDonald F. Static magnetic field effects on the sagittal in Rattus nirvegicus. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993:103:240-246 https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(93)70004-8
  24. Yan QC, Tomita N, lkada Y. Effect of static magnetic field on bone formation of rat femur. Med Eng Phys 1998:20:397-402 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1350-4533(98)00051-4
  25. Xu S, Tomita N, Ohata R, Yan Q. Static magnetic field effects on bone formation of rats with an ischemic bone model. Biomed Mater Eng 2001: 11 :257-263
  26. Cho YW, Lee SB, Chio BB. The effect of magnetismtneodymium magnet) on activity of osteoblast. J Korean Academy of Stomatognathic Function and Occlusion 2003: 19: 185-194
  27. Lee SM, Lee SB, Chio BB. Effect of magnetismfneodymiun magnet) on growth factor receptors of osteoblast. J Korean Academy of Stomatognathic Function and Occlusion 2003:19:87-96