Department of Periodontology and Community Dentistry, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011 Apr;22(4):399-405. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02106.x.
The present study aimed to evaluate and compare two types of implants, i.e. grit-blasted and acid-etched implants (SLActive(®)) with nano-meter-scale hydroxyapatite surface-modified implants (NanoTite™).
For histological and histomorphometrical evaluation, 22 SLActive(®) and 22 Nanotite™ implants were inserted in eleven Beagle dogs. The animals were divided into three groups of healing (A: 2 weeks; B: 4 weeks and C: 8 weeks). Two, 4 and 8 weeks after implantation, the animals were sacrificed and bone-to-implant contact (BIC %), first implant-bone contact (1st BIC) as well as amount of bone (BV) were assessed.
For SLActive(®) and Nanotite™ implants, BIC% increased significantly over time. No statistically significant differences in BIC% were found between SLActive(®) and Nanotite™ at all the respective implantation times. Moreover, for the different healing periods, no significant differences for BV between SLActive(®) and Nanotite™ implants were found.
The present study showed that SLActive(®) and NanoTite™ implants induce a similar bone response after implantation for 2, 4 and 8 weeks in a non-submerged position in the mandible of dogs.
本研究旨在评估和比较两种类型的种植体，即喷砂酸蚀种植体（SLActive(®)）和纳米级羟基磷灰石表面改性种植体（NanoTite™）。
为了进行组织学和组织形态计量学评估，将 22 个 SLActive(®)和 22 个 NanoTite™种植体植入 11 只比格犬中。将动物分为三组愈合期（A：2 周；B：4 周和 C：8 周）。植入后 2、4 和 8 周，处死动物，评估骨与种植体接触率（BIC%）、第一种植体骨接触率（1st BIC）和骨量（BV）。
对于 SLActive(®)和 NanoTite™种植体，BIC%随时间显著增加。在所有相应的植入时间点，SLActive(®)和 NanoTite™种植体之间的 BIC%没有统计学上的显著差异。此外，对于不同的愈合期，SLActive(®)和 NanoTite™种植体之间的 BV 没有显著差异。
本研究表明，在非淹没状态下，SLActive(®)和 NanoTite™种植体在犬下颌骨中植入 2、4 和 8 周后，会引起相似的骨反应。
