99 research outputs found

    Bone healing response in cyclically loaded implants : comparing zero, one, and two loading sessions per day

    Full text link
    When bone implants are loaded, they are inevitably subjected to displacement relative to bone. Such micromotion generates stress/strain states at the interface that can cause beneficial or detrimental sequels. The objective of this study is to better understand the mechanobiology of bone healing at the tissue-implant interface during repeated loading. Machined screw shaped Ti implants were placed in rat tibiae in a hole slightly bigger than the implant diameter. Implants were held stable by a specially-designed bone plate that permits controlled loading. Three loading regimens were applied, (a) zero loading, (b) one daily loading session of 60 cycles with an axial force of 1.5 N/cycle for 7 days, and (c) two such daily sessions with the same axial force also for 7 days. Finite element analysis was used to characterize the mechanobiological conditions produced by the loading sessions. After 7 days, the implants with surrounding interfacial tissue were harvested and processed for histological, histomorphometric and DNA microarray analyses. Histomorphometric analyses revealed that the group subjected to repeated loading sessions exhibited a significant decrease in bone-implant contact and increase in bone-implant distance, as compared to unloaded implants and those subjected to only one loading session. Gene expression profiles differed during osseointegration between all groups mainly with respect to inflammatory and unidentified gene categories. The results indicate that increasing the daily cyclic loading of implants induces deleterious changes in the bone healing response, most likely due to the accumulation of tissue damage and associated inflammatory reaction at the bone-implant interface

    Finite Element Models of Implants in Bone: Interfacial Assumptions

    No full text

    Are teeth superior to implants? A mapping review

    No full text
    Statement of problem: There is a long-held assumption that teeth are superior to implants because the periodontal ligament (PDL) confers a preeminent defense against biologic and mechanical challenges. However, adequate analysis of the literature is lacking. As a result, differential treatment planning of tooth- and implant-supported restorations has been compromised. Purpose: Given an abundance and diversity of research, the purpose of this mapping review was to identify basic scientific gaps in the knowledge of how teeth and implants respond to biologic and mechanical loads. The findings will offer enhanced evidence-based clinical decision-making when considering replacement of periodontally compromised teeth and the design of implant prostheses. Material and methods: The online databases PubMed, Science Direct, and Web of Science were searched. Published work from 1965 to 2020 was collected and independently analyzed by both authors for inclusion in this review. Results: A total of 108 articles met the inclusion criteria of clinical, in vivo, and in vitro studies in the English language on the periradicular and peri-implant bone response to biologic and mechanical loads. The qualitative analysis found that the PDL\u27s enhanced vascularity, stem cell ability, and resident cells that respond to inflammation allow for a more robust defense against biologic threats compared with implants. While the suspensory PDL acts to mediate moderate loads to the bone, higher compressive stress and strain within the PDL itself can initiate a biologic sequence of osteoclastic activity that can affect changes in the adjacent bone. Conversely, the peri-implant bone is more resistant to similar loads and the threshold for overload is higher because of the absence of a stress or strain sensitivity inherent in the PDL. Conclusions: Based on this mapping review, teeth are superior to implants in their ability to resist biologic challenges, but implants are superior to teeth in managing higher compressive loads without prompting bone resorption

    Relationships among bone quality, implant osseointegration, and wnt signaling

    No full text
    A variety of clinical classification schemes have been proposed as a means to identify sites in the oral cavity where implant osseointegration is likely to be successful. Most schemes are based on structural characteristics of the bone, for example, the relative proportion of densely compact, homogenous (type I) bone versus more trabeculated, cancellous (type III) bone. None of these schemes, however, consider potential biological characteristics of the bone. Here, we employed multiscale analyses to identify and characterize type I and type III bones in murine jaws. We then combined these analytical tools with in vivo models of osteotomy healing and implant osseointegration to determine if one type of bone healed faster and supported osseointegration better than another. Collectively, these studies revealed a strong positive correlation between bone remodeling rates, mitotic activity, and osteotomy site healing in type III bone and high endogenous Wnt signaling. This positive correlation was strengthened by observations showing that the osteoid matrix that is responsible for implant osseointegration originates from Wnt-responsive cells and their progeny. The potential application of this knowledge to clinical practice is discussed, along with a theory unifying the role that biology and mechanics play in implant osseointegration.National Institutes of Health, 5 R01 DE024000-12 / National Natural Science Foundation of China, 81500829, 81300914 / University of Chile-Conicyt Becas Chile Award CONICYT PAI/INDUSTRIA 7909001
    corecore