Zetterqvist L, Anneroth G, Nordenram A
Department of Oral Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden.
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1991 Fall;6(3):285-93.
The effect of two different treatment modalities on the tissue integration of Frialit implants was compared in an experimental study in 10 monkeys. The maxillary central incisors were extracted. In one extraction site, chosen by lot, a Frialit implant was immediately inserted, allowing the implant to penetrate the oral mucosa. In the contralateral extraction site, a modified Frialit implant was placed and allowed to heal under a mucoperiosteal flap. None of the implants used in the study was loaded during the observation periods. After experimental periods of 1, 3, 6, and 8 months, the implants were evaluated and monkeys were sacrificed. In situ and histological evaluation showed no significant difference between the two treatment modalities under nonloading conditions. In both cases the healing around the implants was uneventful and good tissue integration was achieved.
在一项针对10只猴子的实验研究中，比较了两种不同治疗方式对Frialit种植体组织整合的影响。拔除上颌中切牙。通过抽签在一个拔牙位点立即植入一枚Frialit种植体，使其穿透口腔黏膜。在对侧拔牙位点，植入一枚改良的Frialit种植体，并在黏骨膜瓣下愈合。研究中使用的所有种植体在观察期内均未加载。在1、3、6和8个月的实验期后，对种植体进行评估并处死猴子。原位和组织学评估显示，在非加载条件下，两种治疗方式之间无显著差异。在两种情况下，种植体周围的愈合均顺利，且实现了良好的组织整合。
