Objectives: In the animal model, we aim to evaluate the bone behavior in two innovative and different laser-treated (L1–L2) titanium implants compared to sandblasted and acid-etched (SBAE) used as control. Materials and Methods: A total of twenty-seven dental implants (8.5 × 3.3 mm) used for the study (Sweden & Martina, Due Carraie Padova-Italy) were placed in three Pelibuey female sheep. Implant surface profilometric, contact angle and EDX analysis were detected. After 15, 30 and 90 days, histological, histomorphometric, SEM-EDX analysis and Bone-to-implant Contact (BIC), Dynamic Osseointegration Index (DOI) and Bone Quality Index (BQI) (as Calcium and Phosphorous atomic percentages ratio) were performed. Results: All surfaces showed relevant profilometric and wettability differences. After 15 days, BIC15 showed great differences in L2 (42.1 ± 2.6) compared to L1 (5.2 ± 3.1) and SBAE (23.3 ± 3.9) as well as after 30 days (L2 (82.4 ± 2.2), L1 (56.2 ± 1.3) and SBAE (77.3 ± 0.4)). After 90 days, relevant lower BIC90 values were detected in L1 (68.4 ± 0.2) compared to L2 (86.4 ± 0.1) and SBAE (86.2 ± 0.6). The DOI showed higher rates of bone growth in L2 after 15 (DOI15 = 2.81) and 30 days (DOI30 = 2.83), compared to L1 (DOI15 = 0.38, DOI30 = 3.40) and SBAE (DOI15 = 1.55, DOI30 = 2.58). The DOI90 drastic slowdown in SBAE (0.96), L1 (0.76), and L2 (0.95) confirmed the Early Osseointegration (EO) as a crucial phase. Moreover, before loading, the lower global BQI in L1 (Ca 44.43 ± 0.08–P 46.14 ± 5.15) and SBAE (Ca 45.31 ± 2.08–P 48.28 ± 1.12) compared to L2 (Ca 79.81 ± 2.08–P 81.85 ± 3.14) allows to assert that osseointegration process and bone healing could not be considered complete if compared to the native bone. Conclusions: The BIC, DOI, and BQI results showed that osseointegration is a dynamic process, confirming the crucial role of surface characteristics able to influence it, especially the early osseointegration (EO) phase. The short-time L2 implants’ higher bone quantity and quality results, compared to L1 and SBAE, suggested the fundamental role of this innovative laser-obtained surface in “secondary stability” and predictable long-term clinical outcomes.
Different Innovative Laser Implants Characteristics Histomorphometric and SEM-EDX Comparison for In Vivo Applications
Mastrangelo, Filiberto;Scarano, AntonioUltimo
2025-01-01
Abstract
Objectives: In the animal model, we aim to evaluate the bone behavior in two innovative and different laser-treated (L1–L2) titanium implants compared to sandblasted and acid-etched (SBAE) used as control. Materials and Methods: A total of twenty-seven dental implants (8.5 × 3.3 mm) used for the study (Sweden & Martina, Due Carraie Padova-Italy) were placed in three Pelibuey female sheep. Implant surface profilometric, contact angle and EDX analysis were detected. After 15, 30 and 90 days, histological, histomorphometric, SEM-EDX analysis and Bone-to-implant Contact (BIC), Dynamic Osseointegration Index (DOI) and Bone Quality Index (BQI) (as Calcium and Phosphorous atomic percentages ratio) were performed. Results: All surfaces showed relevant profilometric and wettability differences. After 15 days, BIC15 showed great differences in L2 (42.1 ± 2.6) compared to L1 (5.2 ± 3.1) and SBAE (23.3 ± 3.9) as well as after 30 days (L2 (82.4 ± 2.2), L1 (56.2 ± 1.3) and SBAE (77.3 ± 0.4)). After 90 days, relevant lower BIC90 values were detected in L1 (68.4 ± 0.2) compared to L2 (86.4 ± 0.1) and SBAE (86.2 ± 0.6). The DOI showed higher rates of bone growth in L2 after 15 (DOI15 = 2.81) and 30 days (DOI30 = 2.83), compared to L1 (DOI15 = 0.38, DOI30 = 3.40) and SBAE (DOI15 = 1.55, DOI30 = 2.58). The DOI90 drastic slowdown in SBAE (0.96), L1 (0.76), and L2 (0.95) confirmed the Early Osseointegration (EO) as a crucial phase. Moreover, before loading, the lower global BQI in L1 (Ca 44.43 ± 0.08–P 46.14 ± 5.15) and SBAE (Ca 45.31 ± 2.08–P 48.28 ± 1.12) compared to L2 (Ca 79.81 ± 2.08–P 81.85 ± 3.14) allows to assert that osseointegration process and bone healing could not be considered complete if compared to the native bone. Conclusions: The BIC, DOI, and BQI results showed that osseointegration is a dynamic process, confirming the crucial role of surface characteristics able to influence it, especially the early osseointegration (EO) phase. The short-time L2 implants’ higher bone quantity and quality results, compared to L1 and SBAE, suggested the fundamental role of this innovative laser-obtained surface in “secondary stability” and predictable long-term clinical outcomes.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
