Effect of biofunctionalized implant surface on osseointegration: a histomorphometric study in dogs

Among the different properties that influence bone apposition around implants, the chemical or biochemical composition of implant surface may interfere on its acceptance by the surrounding bone. The aim of this study was to investigate if a biofunctionalization of implant surface influences the bone apposition in a dog model and to compare it with other surfaces, such as a microstructured created by the grit-blasting/acid-etching process. Eight young adult male mongrel dogs had the bilateral mandibular premolars extracted and each one received 6 implants after 12 weeks, totaling 48 implants in the experiment. Four groups of implants were formed with the same microrough topography with or without some kind of biofunctionalization treatment. After histomorphometric analysis, it was observed that the modified microstructured surface with a "low concentration of the bioactive peptide" provided a higher adjacent bone density (54.6%) when compared to the other groups (microstructured + HA coating = 46.0%, microstructured only = 45.3% and microstructured + "high concentration of the bioactive peptide" = 40.7%), but this difference was not statistically significant. In conclusion, biofunctionalization of the implant surface might interfere in the bone apposition around implants, especially in terms of bone density. Different concentrations of bioactive peptide lead to different results.Entre as diferentes propriedades de uma superfície capazes de influenciar a deposição óssea ao redor de implantes, a composição química e bioquímica pode atuar no reconhecimento do tecido ósseo circundante. O presente trabalho investigou a influência da biofuncionalização de superfícies de implante na deposição óssea ao redor dos mesmos em um modelo animal, comparando-as com outras superfícies, como a microtexturizada obtida pelo processo de jateamento e ataque ácido. Metodologicamente, os pré-molares mandibulares bilaterais de 8 cães foram extraídos e após 12 semanas foram instalados 6 implantes em cada cão, constituindo uma amostra de 48 implantes. Dos 4 grupos experimentais de diferentes superfícies, todos continham a mesma microtopografia rugosa, porém possuindo ou não alguma biofuncionalização. A análise histomorfométrica revelou que a superfície microtexturizada modificada pela adição de baixa concentração peptídica obteve uma maior densidade óssea adjacente (54,6%) quando comparada aos outros grupos (microtexturizada + HA = 46%, somente microtexturizada = 45,3% e microtexturizada com adição de alta concentração peptídica = 40,7%), no entanto estas diferenças numéricas não foram estatisticamente significantes. Dentro deste contexto, conclui-se que a biofuncionalização da superfície de implantes pode interferir na aposição óssea, em particular na densidade óssea, e que diferentes concentrações peptídicas podem conduzir a diferentes resultados.FAPES

Treatment of gingival recessions in heavy smokers using two surgical techniques: a controlled clinical trial

Smokers have small root coverage which is associated with bad vascularity of periodontal tissues. This study evaluated a technique that can increase the blood supply to the periodontal tissues compared with a traditional technique. Twenty heavy smokers (10 males and 10 females) with two bilateral Miller class I gingival recessions received coronally positioned flaps in one side (Control group)and extended flap technique in the other side (Test group). Clinical measurements (probing pocket depth, clinical attachment level, bleeding on probing, gingival recession height, gingival recession width, amount of keratinized tissue, and width and height of the papillae adjacent to the recession) were determined at baseline, 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Salivary cotinina samples were taken as an indicator of the nicotine exposure level. No statistically significant differences (p>0.05) were detected for the clinical measurements or smoke exposure. Both techniques promoted low root coverage (Control group: 43.18% and Test group: 44.52%). In conclusion, no difference was found in root coverage between the techniques. Root coverage is possible and uneventful even, if rather low, in heavy smoker patients with low plaque and bleeding indices