Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

PRİMER STABİLİZASYON OLAN VE OLMAYAN İMPLANTLARDA KEMİK İMPLANT KAYNAŞMASININ BİYOMEKANİK İNCELENMESİ: İN VİVO BİR ÇALIŞMA

Year 2018, Volume: 28 Issue: 2, 188 - 193, 22.04.2018
https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.418847

Abstract







Amaç: Bu
çalışmada rat tibiyalarına yerleştirilen primer stabilite olan ve olmayan
titanyum implantların osseointegrasyonunun biyomekanik incelenmesi
amaçlanmıştır.




Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu
çalışmada kullanılan 42 adet, dişi Spraque Dawley rat 2 gruba ayrıldı. Primer
Stabili- te Olan (PS+) Grup (n=21); 2.5 mm çapında 6 mm uzunluğunda tornalanmış
yüzey titanyum implantlar deneklerin sağ ve sol tibiyalarına primer
stabilizasyon sağlanarak, Primer Stabilite Olmayan (PS-) Grup (n=21); 2.5 mm
çapında 6 mm uzunluğunda titanyum implantlar deneklerin sağ ve sol tibiyalarına
primer stabilizasyon sağlanmaksızın steril şartlarda cerrahi yöntemle
yerleştirildi. Denekler her bir grupta eşit rat olacak şekilde 4. (n=7), 8.
(n=7) ve 12. (n=7) hafta sonunda sakrifiye edildi. İmplantların
biyomekanik analizleri basma testine
 tabi tutularak
gerçekleştirildi.




Bulgular:
Kuvvet değerleri PS+ grubunda PS- grubuna göre 4., 8. ve 12. haftaların sonunda
yüksek tespit edildi (P<0.05). PS+ grubunda 4., 8. ve 12. hafta kuvvet
değer- lerinde fark tespit edilmedi (P>0.05). PS- grubunda kuv- vet
değerleri 4. ve 8. haftalar arasında bir fark meydana getirmemişken
(P>0.05), 12. hafta kuvvet değerleri 4. ve 8. haftalara göre yüksek tespit
edidi (P<0.05). Yer değiş- tirme miktarları 4. haftada PS- grubunda PS+
grubundan yüksek tespit edilirken (P<0.05), 8. ve 12. hafta yer de- ğiştirme
değerlerinde gruplar arası bir fark tespit edilmedi (P>0.05).  PS+ grubunun 4., 8. ve 12.haftalarda yer
değiştirme miktarları arasında bir fark tespit edilmezken (P>0.05), PS-
grubunda 4. hafta yer değiştirme değeri 8. ve 12. haftalara göre yüksek tespit
edildi (P<0.05).




Sonuç: Primer
stabilizasyon olan implantlarda osseoin- tegrasyon primer stabilite olmayan
implantlara göre daha iyi düzeyde elde edildi. Primer stabilite olmadan da
osseointegrasyon sağlanabilir.



Anahtar
Kelimeler:
Primer stabilizasyon, osseointeg, rasyon, dental implant, rat tibiyası, biyomekanik

BIOMECHANIC EVALUATION
OF THE BONE IMPLANT CONNECTION OF THE PRIMARY AND NON-PRIMARY STABILIZED TITANIUM
IMPLANTS: AN IN VIVO STUDY








ABSTRACT




 




Aim: In
this study it was aimed to that biomechanic evaluation of the primary
stabilized and non-primary stabilized titanium implant osseointegration in rat
tibias.




Materials and Methods: In
this study, 42 female Spraque Dawley rat were used and diveded 2 groups: Primer
stabilized group (PS+) (n=21); 2.5 diameter and 6 mm long titanium implant was
integrated in rat tibias both left and right side with primary stabilization. Non
primary stabilized (PS-) (n=21) group; 2.5 diameter and 6 mm long titanium
implant was integrated in rat tibias both left and right side without primary
stabilization. Surgical procedure was done under steril condition. Rats were
sacrified in 4. (n=7), 8. (n=7) and 12. (n=7) weeks in equal number in each
group.
Biomechanical analysis of the implants were done with
compression test




Results: Force
magnitudes detected higly compared in PS+ compared PS- in 4., 8 and 12. weeks
(P<0.05). In PS+ any difference was not detected in forces at 4., 8. and 12.
weeks (P>0.05). In PS- group; difference was detected in forces at 12. week
when compared 4. and 8. weeks (P<0.05). Displacement in PS- group detected
highly compared with PS+ in 4. week (P<0.05), but in 8. and 12. weeks any
difference was not detected between two groups (P>0.05). any difference was
not detected at 4., 8. and 12. weeks in displacement values in PS+ group
(P>0.05). But in PS- group displacement values was detected highly in 4.
week compared 8. and 12. Weeks (P>0.05).




Conclusion:
Osseointegration in primary stabilized implants was detected better than
non-primary stabilized implants. Osseointagration could enhance without primary
stabilization.  

Keywords: Primary stabilization, osseointegration, dental
implant, rat tibia, biomechanic





References

  • 1. Eltas A, Dundar S, Uzun İH, Malkoç MA. Dental implant başarısının ve hasta profilinin değerlendiril- mesi: retrospektif bir çalışma. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg 2013; 21: 1-8.
  • 2. Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, Behneke A, Behneke N, Hirt HP, Belser UC, Lang NP. Long term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 1997;8: 161-72.
  • 3. Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL, Sammartino G, Galindo-Moreno P, Trisi P, Steigmann M, Rebaudi A, Palti A, Pikos MA, Schwartz-Arad D, Choukroun J,Gutierrez-Perez JL, Marenzi G, Valavanis DK. Implant success, survival and failure: The International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Implant Dent 2008; 17: 5-15.
  • 4. Javed F, Romanos GE. The role of primary stability for successful immediate loading of dental implants. A literature review. J Dent 2010;38:612–20.
  • 5. Lioubavina-Hack N, Lang NP, Karring T. Significance of primary stability for osseointegration of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006; 17:244-50.
  • 6. Davies JE. Understanding peri-implant endosseous healing. J Dent Educ 2003; 67:932-49.
  • 7. Berglundh T, Abrahamsson I, Lang NP, Lindhe J. De novo alveolar bone formation adjacent to endosseous implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003; 14:251-62. 8. Davies JE. Mechanisms of endosseous integration. Review. Int J Prosthodont. 1998;11:391-401.
  • 9. Sivolella S, Bressan E, Salata LA, Urrutia ZA, Lang NP, Botticelli D. Osteogenesis at implants without primary bone contact - an experimental study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:542-9.
  • 10. Akimoto K, Becker W, Persson R, Baker DA, Rohrer MD, O'Neal RB. Evaluation of titanium implants placed into simulated extraction sockets: a study in dogs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:351-60.
  • 11. Knox R, Caudill R, Meffert R. Histologic evaluation of dental endosseous implants placed in surgically created extraction defects. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1991;11:364-75.
  • 12. Yurttutan ME, Kestane R, Keskin A, Dereci O. Biomechanical evaluation of oversized drilling on implant stability - an experimental study in sheep. J Pak Med Assoc 2016;66:147-50. - 13. Branemark R, Ohrnell LO, Nilsson P, Thomsen P. Biomechanical characterization of osseointegration during healing: an experimental in vivo study in the rat. Biomaterials 1997;18:969-78.
  • 14. Ogawa T, Ozawa S, Shih JH, Ryu KH, Sukotjo C, Yang JM, Nishimura I. Biomechanical evaluation of osseous implants having different surface topographies in rats. J Dent Res 2000;79:1857-63.
  • 15. Zhou H, Hou Y, Zhu Z, Xiao W, Xu Q, Li L, Li X, Chen W. Effects of Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound on Implant Osseointegration in Ovariectomized Rats. J Ultrasound Med 2016;35:747-54.
  • 16. Lu L, Zhijian H, Lei L, Wenchuan C, Zhimin Z. Berberine in Combination with Insulin Has Additive Effects on Titanium Implants Osseointegration in Diabetes Mellitus Rats. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med 2015:824259.
  • 17. Pontes AE, de Toledo CT, Garcia VG, Ribeiro FS, Sakakura CE. Torque Analysis of a Triple Acid-Etched Titanium Implant Surface. Scientific World Journal 2015:819879.
  • 18. Jung UW, Kim S, Kim YH, Cha JK, Lee IS, Choi SH. Osseointegration of dental implants installed without mechanical engagement: a histometric analysis in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:1297-301.
  • 19. Jung UW, Kim S, Lee IK, Kim MS, Lee JS, Kim HJ. Secondary stability of microthickness hydroxyapatite-coated dental implants installed without primary stability in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:1169-74.
  • 20. Carlsson L, Rostlund T, Albrektsson B, Albrektsson T. Implant fixation improved by close fit. Cylindrical implant-bone interface studied in rabbits. Acta Orthop Scand 1988;59:272-5.
Year 2018, Volume: 28 Issue: 2, 188 - 193, 22.04.2018
https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.418847

Abstract

References

  • 1. Eltas A, Dundar S, Uzun İH, Malkoç MA. Dental implant başarısının ve hasta profilinin değerlendiril- mesi: retrospektif bir çalışma. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg 2013; 21: 1-8.
  • 2. Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, Behneke A, Behneke N, Hirt HP, Belser UC, Lang NP. Long term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 1997;8: 161-72.
  • 3. Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL, Sammartino G, Galindo-Moreno P, Trisi P, Steigmann M, Rebaudi A, Palti A, Pikos MA, Schwartz-Arad D, Choukroun J,Gutierrez-Perez JL, Marenzi G, Valavanis DK. Implant success, survival and failure: The International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Implant Dent 2008; 17: 5-15.
  • 4. Javed F, Romanos GE. The role of primary stability for successful immediate loading of dental implants. A literature review. J Dent 2010;38:612–20.
  • 5. Lioubavina-Hack N, Lang NP, Karring T. Significance of primary stability for osseointegration of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006; 17:244-50.
  • 6. Davies JE. Understanding peri-implant endosseous healing. J Dent Educ 2003; 67:932-49.
  • 7. Berglundh T, Abrahamsson I, Lang NP, Lindhe J. De novo alveolar bone formation adjacent to endosseous implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003; 14:251-62. 8. Davies JE. Mechanisms of endosseous integration. Review. Int J Prosthodont. 1998;11:391-401.
  • 9. Sivolella S, Bressan E, Salata LA, Urrutia ZA, Lang NP, Botticelli D. Osteogenesis at implants without primary bone contact - an experimental study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:542-9.
  • 10. Akimoto K, Becker W, Persson R, Baker DA, Rohrer MD, O'Neal RB. Evaluation of titanium implants placed into simulated extraction sockets: a study in dogs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:351-60.
  • 11. Knox R, Caudill R, Meffert R. Histologic evaluation of dental endosseous implants placed in surgically created extraction defects. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1991;11:364-75.
  • 12. Yurttutan ME, Kestane R, Keskin A, Dereci O. Biomechanical evaluation of oversized drilling on implant stability - an experimental study in sheep. J Pak Med Assoc 2016;66:147-50. - 13. Branemark R, Ohrnell LO, Nilsson P, Thomsen P. Biomechanical characterization of osseointegration during healing: an experimental in vivo study in the rat. Biomaterials 1997;18:969-78.
  • 14. Ogawa T, Ozawa S, Shih JH, Ryu KH, Sukotjo C, Yang JM, Nishimura I. Biomechanical evaluation of osseous implants having different surface topographies in rats. J Dent Res 2000;79:1857-63.
  • 15. Zhou H, Hou Y, Zhu Z, Xiao W, Xu Q, Li L, Li X, Chen W. Effects of Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound on Implant Osseointegration in Ovariectomized Rats. J Ultrasound Med 2016;35:747-54.
  • 16. Lu L, Zhijian H, Lei L, Wenchuan C, Zhimin Z. Berberine in Combination with Insulin Has Additive Effects on Titanium Implants Osseointegration in Diabetes Mellitus Rats. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med 2015:824259.
  • 17. Pontes AE, de Toledo CT, Garcia VG, Ribeiro FS, Sakakura CE. Torque Analysis of a Triple Acid-Etched Titanium Implant Surface. Scientific World Journal 2015:819879.
  • 18. Jung UW, Kim S, Kim YH, Cha JK, Lee IS, Choi SH. Osseointegration of dental implants installed without mechanical engagement: a histometric analysis in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:1297-301.
  • 19. Jung UW, Kim S, Lee IK, Kim MS, Lee JS, Kim HJ. Secondary stability of microthickness hydroxyapatite-coated dental implants installed without primary stability in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:1169-74.
  • 20. Carlsson L, Rostlund T, Albrektsson B, Albrektsson T. Implant fixation improved by close fit. Cylindrical implant-bone interface studied in rabbits. Acta Orthop Scand 1988;59:272-5.
There are 18 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Health Care Administration
Journal Section Araştırma Makalesi
Authors

Serkan Dündar

Ömer Çakmak This is me

Murat Yavuz Solmaz This is me

Publication Date April 22, 2018
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 28 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Dündar, S., Çakmak, Ö., & Solmaz, M. Y. (2018). PRİMER STABİLİZASYON OLAN VE OLMAYAN İMPLANTLARDA KEMİK İMPLANT KAYNAŞMASININ BİYOMEKANİK İNCELENMESİ: İN VİVO BİR ÇALIŞMA. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(2), 188-193. https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.418847
AMA Dündar S, Çakmak Ö, Solmaz MY. PRİMER STABİLİZASYON OLAN VE OLMAYAN İMPLANTLARDA KEMİK İMPLANT KAYNAŞMASININ BİYOMEKANİK İNCELENMESİ: İN VİVO BİR ÇALIŞMA. Ata Diş Hek Fak Derg. April 2018;28(2):188-193. doi:10.17567/ataunidfd.418847
Chicago Dündar, Serkan, Ömer Çakmak, and Murat Yavuz Solmaz. “PRİMER STABİLİZASYON OLAN VE OLMAYAN İMPLANTLARDA KEMİK İMPLANT KAYNAŞMASININ BİYOMEKANİK İNCELENMESİ: İN VİVO BİR ÇALIŞMA”. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi 28, no. 2 (April 2018): 188-93. https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.418847.
EndNote Dündar S, Çakmak Ö, Solmaz MY (April 1, 2018) PRİMER STABİLİZASYON OLAN VE OLMAYAN İMPLANTLARDA KEMİK İMPLANT KAYNAŞMASININ BİYOMEKANİK İNCELENMESİ: İN VİVO BİR ÇALIŞMA. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi 28 2 188–193.
IEEE S. Dündar, Ö. Çakmak, and M. Y. Solmaz, “PRİMER STABİLİZASYON OLAN VE OLMAYAN İMPLANTLARDA KEMİK İMPLANT KAYNAŞMASININ BİYOMEKANİK İNCELENMESİ: İN VİVO BİR ÇALIŞMA”, Ata Diş Hek Fak Derg, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 188–193, 2018, doi: 10.17567/ataunidfd.418847.
ISNAD Dündar, Serkan et al. “PRİMER STABİLİZASYON OLAN VE OLMAYAN İMPLANTLARDA KEMİK İMPLANT KAYNAŞMASININ BİYOMEKANİK İNCELENMESİ: İN VİVO BİR ÇALIŞMA”. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi 28/2 (April 2018), 188-193. https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.418847.
JAMA Dündar S, Çakmak Ö, Solmaz MY. PRİMER STABİLİZASYON OLAN VE OLMAYAN İMPLANTLARDA KEMİK İMPLANT KAYNAŞMASININ BİYOMEKANİK İNCELENMESİ: İN VİVO BİR ÇALIŞMA. Ata Diş Hek Fak Derg. 2018;28:188–193.
MLA Dündar, Serkan et al. “PRİMER STABİLİZASYON OLAN VE OLMAYAN İMPLANTLARDA KEMİK İMPLANT KAYNAŞMASININ BİYOMEKANİK İNCELENMESİ: İN VİVO BİR ÇALIŞMA”. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 28, no. 2, 2018, pp. 188-93, doi:10.17567/ataunidfd.418847.
Vancouver Dündar S, Çakmak Ö, Solmaz MY. PRİMER STABİLİZASYON OLAN VE OLMAYAN İMPLANTLARDA KEMİK İMPLANT KAYNAŞMASININ BİYOMEKANİK İNCELENMESİ: İN VİVO BİR ÇALIŞMA. Ata Diş Hek Fak Derg. 2018;28(2):188-93.

Bu eser Creative Commons Alıntı-GayriTicari-Türetilemez 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır. Tıklayınız.