Nicolau Larissa Azeredo da Silva Lessa, Sartoretto Suelen Cristina, Nunes Pamella Santana, Gheno Ezio, Granjeiro Jose Mauro, D'Angelo Domenico, Mussano Federico, Diuana Calasans-Maia Monica, Bella Olivio Della, Motta Francesca, Louro Rafael Seabra
Post-Graduation Program in Dentistry, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi 24020-140, Brazil.
Clinical Research Laboratory, Dentistry School, Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niteroi 24220-140, Brazil.
Materials (Basel). 2025 Aug 14;18(16):3810. doi: 10.3390/ma18163810.
The different macro and micro geometries of dental implants are parameters that directly affect osseointegration, making them an important area for research. The objective of this preclinical study was to compare, through histological and histomorphometric analyses, the biological response of two different dental implant surfaces in osseointegration. Surface morphology and chemistry were characterized by SEM/EDX, optical-emission spectroscopy, protein adsorption (BSA), and adipose-derived stem-cell morphology. For the in vivo arm, ten commercially pure titanium implants (n = 5 LS160 + 5 SBAE) were placed bilaterally in the tibiae of five skeletally mature New Zealand rabbits (one implant of each surface per animal). After six weeks, undecalcified sections were prepared and bone-to-implant contact (BIC) and bone-area-fraction occupancy (BAFO) were quantified histomorphometrically. Data normality was confirmed with the Shapiro-Wilk test; paired two-tailed Student's -tests were applied (α = 0.05). Results: The descriptive histological analysis showed a fraction of pre-existing bone in all experimental groups, which probably ensured primary stability. Adjacent to this area, it was possible to observe peri-implant newformed bone in all tested groups. The results of the histomorphometric analysis of BIC and BAFO were considered normal by the Shapiro-Wilk test ( > 0.05); after six weeks of implantation, the BIC values for the LS160 and SBAE groups were 44.13 (15.83-72.43) and 39.24 (10.72-89.21), respectively. The analysis of variance (ANOVA and Tukey's post-test) showed no statistical differences between the groups tested. Likewise, the bone volume density showed no statistical differences between the groups (ANOVA and Tukey's post-test) with averages of 41.27 (C.I. 24.00-58.55) and 26.52 (C.I. -17.51-70.54) in the LS160 and SBAE groups, respectively. Although both surfaces showed similar osseointegration after six weeks, the new surface appears to be a promising, eco-friendly alternative to SBAE. Future studies with shorter time points and larger samples are needed to assess early biological responses.
牙种植体不同的宏观和微观几何形状是直接影响骨整合的参数,使其成为一个重要的研究领域。这项临床前研究的目的是通过组织学和组织形态计量学分析,比较两种不同牙种植体表面在骨整合中的生物学反应。通过扫描电子显微镜/能谱仪(SEM/EDX)、光发射光谱、蛋白质吸附(牛血清白蛋白)和脂肪来源干细胞形态对表面形态和化学性质进行了表征。对于体内实验部分,将十枚商业纯钛种植体(n = 5枚LS160 + 5枚SBAE)双侧植入五只骨骼成熟的新西兰兔的胫骨中(每只动物植入每种表面的一枚种植体)。六周后,制备未脱钙切片,并通过组织形态计量学对骨与种植体接触(BIC)和骨面积分数占有率(BAFO)进行量化。用夏皮罗-威尔克检验确认数据正态性;应用配对双尾学生t检验(α = 0.05)。结果:描述性组织学分析显示,所有实验组中都有一部分预先存在的骨,这可能确保了初期稳定性。在该区域附近,可以观察到所有测试组中种植体周围新形成的骨。BIC和BAFO的组织形态计量学分析结果经夏皮罗-威尔克检验认为是正态的(> 0.05);植入六周后,LS160组和SBAE组的BIC值分别为44.13(15.83 - 72.43)和39.24(10.72 - 89.21)。方差分析(ANOVA和图基事后检验)显示,测试组之间无统计学差异。同样,骨体积密度在两组之间也无统计学差异(ANOVA和图基事后检验),LS160组和SBAE组的平均值分别为41.27(置信区间24.00 - 58.55)和26.52(置信区间 - 17.51 - 70.54)。尽管六周后两种表面显示出相似的骨整合情况,但新表面似乎是一种有前景的、环保的SBAE替代方案。需要进行时间点更短、样本量更大的未来研究来评估早期生物学反应。