Son Young-Tak, Son KeunBaDa, Cho Hoseong, Lee Jae-Mok, Saleah Sm Abu, Hwang JunHo, Lee JongHoon, Kim HyunDeok, Jin Myoung-Uk, Kim Jeehyun, Jeon Mansik, Lee Kyu-Bok
Department of Dental Science, Graduate School, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Republic of Korea.
Advanced Dental Device Development Institute, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Republic of Korea.
J Adv Prosthodont. 2025 Apr;17(2):101-114. doi: 10.4047/jap.2025.17.2.101. Epub 2025 Apr 25.
The purpose of this study was to compare the surface characteristics and healing patterns after implantation of implants treated with SLA and those treated with both SLA and femtosecond laser.
A total of 10 male New Zealand white rabbits were used to compare recovery levels between implants treated with SLA (SLA group) and those treated with both SLA and femtosecond laser (SF group). The implants' surface characteristics were determined through topographic evaluation, element analysis, surface roughness, and wettability evaluation. In total, 4 implants were placed in each rabbit (2 in each tibia), with 20 implants per treatment group. Using the implant stability quotient (ISQ), marginal bone volume, and histological analysis (bone-to-implant contact (BIC), bone volume/tissue volume (BV/TV)), and post implantation outcomes were assessed. Outcome data were analyzed using independent t-tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, and one-way ANOVA (α = 0.05).
No significant differences were noted between SLA and SF groups in terms of ISQ, marginal bone volume, BIC, and BV/TV ( > .05). However, significant differences in ISQ were observed within each group over time ( < .05). Furthermore, significant differences were noted in the marginal bone volume of the SF group ( < .05) and the BV/TV of the SLA group between weeks 4 and 6 ( < .05).
Surface treatment via SLA and femtosecond laser is feasible compared with SLA treatment alone in terms of ISQ, marginal bone volume, BIC, and BV/TV. However, further clinical research is warranted.
本研究旨在比较经喷砂酸蚀处理（SLA）的种植体与经SLA和飞秒激光联合处理的种植体植入后的表面特性和愈合模式。
总共使用10只雄性新西兰白兔，比较经SLA处理的种植体（SLA组）和经SLA与飞秒激光联合处理的种植体（SF组）的恢复水平。通过形貌评估、元素分析、表面粗糙度和润湿性评估来确定种植体的表面特性。每只兔子植入4枚种植体（每侧胫骨各2枚），每个治疗组共20枚种植体。使用种植体稳定性商数（ISQ）、边缘骨体积和组织学分析（骨与种植体接触率（BIC）、骨体积/组织体积（BV/TV））评估植入后的结果。使用独立t检验、曼-惠特尼U检验、威尔科克森符号秩检验和单因素方差分析（α = 0.05）对结果数据进行分析。
SLA组和SF组在ISQ、边缘骨体积、BIC和BV/TV方面未观察到显著差异（P >.05）。然而，随着时间的推移，每组内的ISQ均观察到显著差异（P <.05）。此外，在第4周和第6周之间，SF组的边缘骨体积（P <.05）和SLA组的BV/TV（P <.05）存在显著差异。
就ISQ、边缘骨体积、BIC和BV/TV而言，与单独的SLA处理相比，通过SLA和飞秒激光进行表面处理是可行的。然而，仍需要进一步的临床研究。
