The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of removal torques between laser-treated and SLA-treated implant surfaces in rabbit tibiae

  • Kang, Nam-Seok (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung-Pook National University) ;
  • Li, Lin-Jie (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung-Pook National University) ;
  • Cho, Sung-Am (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung-Pook National University)
  • Received : 2014.01.24
  • Accepted : 2014.06.17
  • Published : 2014.08.29
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. The purpose of this study was to compare removal torques and surface topography between laser treated and sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched (SLA) treated implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Laser-treated implants (experimental group) and SLA-treated implants (control group) 8 mm in length and 3.4 mm in diameter were inserted into both sides of the tibiae of 12 rabbits. Surface analysis was accomplished using a field emission scanning electron microscope (FE-SEM; Hitachi S-4800; Japan) under ${\times}25$, ${\times}150$ and ${\times}1,000$ magnification. Surface components were analyzed using energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS). Rabbits were sacrificed after a 6-week healing period. The removal torque was measured using the MGT-12 digital torque meter (Mark-10 Co., Copiague, NY, USA). RESULTS. In the experimental group, the surface analysis showed uniform porous structures under ${\times}25$, ${\times}150$ and ${\times}1,000$ magnification. Pore sizes in the experimental group were 20-40 mm and consisted of numerous small pores, whereas pore sizes in the control group were 0.5-2.0 mm. EDS analysis showed no significant difference between the two groups. The mean removal torque in the laser-treated and the SLA-treated implant groups were 79.4 Ncm (SD = 20.4; range 34.6-104.3 Ncm) and 52.7 Ncm (SD = 17.2; range 18.7-73.8 Ncm), respectively. The removal torque in the laser-treated surface implant group was significantly higher than that in the control group (P=.004). CONCLUSION. In this study, removal torque values were significantly higher for laser-treated surface implants than for SLA-treated surface implants.

Keywords

References

  1. Albrektsson T, Branemark PI, Hansson HA, Lindstrom J. Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. Acta Orthop Scand 1981;52:155-70. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453678108991776
  2. Roberts WE. Fundamental principles of bone physiology, metabolism and loading. In Naert I, van Steengerghe D, Worthington P, eds. Osseointegration in oral rehabilitation. Carol Stream, IL, Quintessence; 1993. p. 163-4.
  3. Carlsson L, Rostlund T, Albrektsson B, Albrektsson T. Removal torques for polished and rough titanium implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988;3:21-4.
  4. Gotfredsen K, Nimb L, Hjorting-Hansen E, Jensen JS, Holmen A. Histomorphometric and removal torque analysis for TiO2-blasted titanium implants. An experimental study on dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 1992;3:77-84. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030205.x
  5. Cordioli G, Majzoub Z, Piattelli A, Scarano A. Removal torque and histomorphometric investigation of 4 different titanium surfaces: an experimental study in the rabbit tibia. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:668-74.
  6. Klokkevold PR, Nishimura RD, Adachi M, Caputo A. Osseointegration enhanced by chemical etching of the titanium surface. A torque removal study in the rabbit. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:442-7. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080601.x
  7. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T, Andersson B, Krol JJ. A histomorphometric and removal torque study of screw-shaped titanium implants with three different surface topographies. Clin Oral Implants Res 1995;6:24-30. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1995.060103.x
  8. Ferguson SJ, Langhoff JD, Voelter K, von Rechenberg B, Scharnweber D, Bierbaum S, Schnabelrauch M, Kautz AR, Frauchiger VM, Mueller TL, van Lenthe GH, Schlottig F. Biomechanical comparison of different surface modifications for dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23: 1037-46.
  9. Marin C, Bonfante EA, Granato R, Suzuki M, Granjeiro JM, Coelho PG. The effect of alterations on resorbable blasting media processed implant surfaces on early bone healing: a study in rabbits. Implant Dent 2011;20:167-77. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e318211fb32
  10. Kang SH, Cho SA. Comparison of removal torques for lasertreated titanium implants with anodized implants. J Craniofac Surg 2011;22:1491-5. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e31821d4d98
  11. Hofmann AA, Bloebaum RD, Bachus KN. Progression of human bone ingrowth into porous-coated implants. Rate of bone ingrowth in humans. Acta Orthop Scand 1997;68:161-6. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453679709004000
  12. Hall J, Miranda-Burgos P, Sennerby L. Stimulation of directed bone growth at oxidized titanium implants by macroscopic grooves: an in vivo study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005;7:S76-82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2005.tb00078.x
  13. Mangano C, Perrotti V, Iezzi G, Scarano A, Mangano F, Piattelli A. Bone response to modified titanium surface implants in nonhuman primates (Papio ursinus) and humans: histological evaluation. J Oral Implantol 2008;34:17-24. https://doi.org/10.1563/1548-1336(2008)34[17:BRTNMT]2.0.CO;2
  14. Schwartz Z, Martin JY, Dean DD, Simpson J, Cochran DL, Boyan BD. Effect of titanium surface roughness on chondrocyte proliferation, matrix production, and differentiation depends on the state of cell maturation. J Biomed Mater Res 1996;30:145-55. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199602)30:2<145::AID-JBM3>3.0.CO;2-R
  15. Hallgren C, Reimers H, Chakarov D, Gold J, Wennerberg A. An in vivo study of bone response to implants topographically modified by laser micromachining. Biomaterials 2003; 24:701-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(02)00266-1
  16. Gaggl A, Schultes G, Muller WD, Karcher H. Scanning electron microscopical analysis of laser-treated titanium implant surfaces--a comparative study. Biomaterials 2000;21:1067-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00002-8
  17. Cho SA, Jung SK. A removal torque of the laser-treated titanium implants in rabbit tibia. Biomaterials 2003;24:4859-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00377-6
  18. Kang SH, Cho SA. Comparison of removal torques for lasertreated titanium implants with anodized implants. J Craniofac Surg 2011;22:1491-5. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e31821d4d98
  19. Palmquist A, Emanuelsson L, Branemark R, Thomsen P. Biomechanical, histological and ultrastructural analyses of laser micro- and nano-structured titanium implant after 6 months in rabbit. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2011;97:289-98.
  20. Wie H, Hero H, Solheim T. Hot isostatic pressing-processed hydroxyapatite-coated titanium implants: light microscopic and scanning electron microscopy investigations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:837-44.
  21. Han CH, Johansson CB, Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T. Quantitative and qualitative investigations of surface enlarged titanium and titanium alloy implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1998;9:1-10. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1998.090101.x
  22. Sennerby L, Thomsen P, Ericson LE. Early tissue response to titanium implants inserted in rabbit cortical bone. Part I. Light microscopic obserrvations. J Mater Sci Mater Med 1993;4:240-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00122275
  23. Rong M, Zhou L, Gou Z, Zhu A, Zhou D. The early osseointegration of the laser-treated and acid-etched dental implants surface: an experimental study in rabbits. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2009;20:1721-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-009-3730-4

Cited by

  1. Novel surfaces and osseointegration in implant dentistry pp.20411618, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/jicd.12349
  2. Clinical outcome of immediately and early loaded implants with laser treated surface: a 3-year retrospective study vol.10, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2018.10.2.163
  3. The Affinity of Human Fetal Osteoblast to Laser-Modified Titanium Implant Fixtures vol.14, pp.None, 2020, https://doi.org/10.2174/1874210602014010052
  4. Selective laser melted titanium implants play a positive role in early osseointegration in type 2 diabetes mellitus rats vol.39, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2018-419