			Home About us Contact

Secondary Stability (secondary + stability)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	100%

Selected Abstracts

Does orthodontic loading influence bone mineral density around titanium miniplates?

ORTHODONTICS & CRANIOFACIAL RESEARCH, Issue 1 2010
An experimental study in dogs
To cite this article: Cornelis MA, Mahy P, Devogelaer JP, De Clerck HJ, Nyssen-Behets C: Does orthodontic loading influence bone mineral density around titanium miniplates? An experimental study in dogs Orthod Craniofac Res 2010;13:21,27 Structured Abstract Authors,,, Cornelis MA, Mahy P, Devogelaer JP, De Clerck HJ, Nyssen-Behets C Objectives,,, To evaluate whether orthodontic loading has an effect on miniplate stability and bone mineral density (BMD) around the screws supporting those miniplates. Setting and Sample Population,,, Two miniplates were inserted in each jaw quadrant of 10 dogs. Material and Methods,,, Two weeks later, coil springs were placed between the miniplates of one upper quadrant and between those of the contralateral lower quadrant. The other miniplates remained non-loaded. The dogs were sacrificed 7 or 29 weeks after surgery, and the jaws were scanned with peripheral Quantitative Computed Tomography (pQCT) to assess BMD. Results,,, The success rate was not significantly different for the loaded and the non-loaded miniplates, but was significantly higher for the maxillary compared to the mandibular ones. Mobility, associated with local inflammation, most often occurred during the transition between primary and secondary stability. pQCT showed higher BMD around mandibular vs. maxillary screws, without significant difference between loaded and non-loaded ones. Furthermore, load direction did not lead to any significant difference in BMD. Conclusion,,, Miniplate stability and BMD of the adjacent bone did not appear to depend significantly on orthodontic loading, but rather on the receptor site anatomy. [source]

One-Year Prospective Three-Center Study Comparing the Outcome of a "Soft Bone Implant" (Prototype Mk IV) and the Standard Brånemark Implant

CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, Issue 2 2003
Bertil Friberg DDS
ABSTRACT Background: Oral implant treatment ad modum Brånemark has been used for decades in the rehabilitation of edentate and partially dentate patients. Posterior jaw regions frequently exhibit bone of poor texture, and it is often difficult to obtain primary stability. Thus, it may prove beneficial to deviate from the original protocol and to use implants with a modified design, for example, with a slightly tapered geometry. Purpose: The purpose of the investigation was to compare the early behavior of a modified (prototype Mk IV, Branemark System, Nobel Biocare AB, Gothenburg, Sweden; test) implant with that of the standard Brånemark implant (control) in regions of mainly type 4 bone. Materials and Methods: Three Swedish centers participated, and a total of 44 patients were treated with oral implants for 39 maxillas and 5 mandibles. The study focused on the most distal right and left implant sites (88 implants), which were randomized to receive either a test or a control implant. Various parameters were recorded, such as registered insertion torque (OsseoCare, Nobel Biocare AB), wobbling during insertion, primary and secondary stability (as measured with resonance frequency), and marginal bone loss. The implants were followed up for 1 year. Results.: The test implant more frequently required a higher insertion torque and showed a significantly higher primary stability than the control implant. This difference in stability leveled out over time, and test and control implants exhibited similar secondary stability at abutment operation and at the 1-year visit. Wobbling during insertion was rarely recorded for either of the implant designs. The 1-year cumulative success rate was 93.1% for test implants and 88.4% for control implants. Conclusions: The modified implant design resulted in an increased primary stability, which may be important when placing implants in jaw regions of type 4 bone. However, independent of the achieved primary stability, successful implants tended to approach similar secondary stability in the two designs tested. [source]

A study of the bone healing kinetics of plateau versus screw root design titanium dental implants

CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, Issue 3 2009
Gary Leonard
Abstract Objective: This study was designed to compare the bone healing process around plateau root from (PRF) and screw root from (SRF) titanium dental implants over the immediate 12 week healing period post implant placement. Material and methods: 32PRF and 32SRF implants were placed in 8 beagle dogs at 12, 8, 5 and 3 weeks prior to enthanisation using a bilaterally balanced distribution. Undecalcified ground sections were prepared from the biopsies taken and histometric measurements of bone implant contact (BIC) and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO) were made on the middle 5 mm portion of each 8 mm implant root length. Results: The analysis showed that although measurements of bone to implant contact (BIC) and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO) tended to be greater for the SRF implants at all four time points, the differences in measurements between implant types did not reach statistical significance (P=0.07, P=0.06). The effect of time on BIC and BAFO was found to be strongly significant for both implant types thus indicating a statistically significant increase in BIC and BAFO overall with time (P=0.004, P=0.002). Furthermore, both PRF and SRF implants behaved similarly over time with measurements of BIC and BAFO progressing in parallel. Histomorphologic analysis of these sections demonstrated the prominent role of woven bone (callus) in the bone healing process around PRF implants. Conclusion: The results can be interpreted to indicate a comparable development of secondary stability for both PRF and SRF implant designs. However, as these parameters reflect the structural connection between implant and bone and not the functional properties of the bone to implant interface, they cannot be regarded as comprehensive measures of osseointegration. This particularly relevant given the reduced load bearing capacity of woven bone. [source]

Influence of implant taper on the primary and secondary stability of osseointegrated titanium implants

CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, Issue 4 2004
Dominic O'Sullivan
Abstract Objectives: The study presented was designed to analyse the mechanical performance and the primary and secondary stability characteristics of endosseous titanium implants with 1° (EXP1) and 2° (EXP2) of taper when compared with the standard Brånemark design (Nobel Biocare AB, Gothenburg, Sweden). Materials and methods: One pair of 10 mm EXP1 and control implants were placed in the femoral condyles of six rabbits. Paired 6 mm EXP1 and control implants and 6 mm EXP2 and control implants were placed in the tibial metaphysis. The control implants used were 4 mm diameter standard Brånemark implants, the same length as the test implants. At placement, insertion torque (IT) and resonance frequency analysis (RFA) measurements were performed. Six weeks postoperatively when the animals were killed, RFA and removal torque (RT) measurements were made. Results: At placement, significantly higher IT was needed to insert the EXP implants compared with the controls. RFA values were significantly higher for EXP1 implants placed in the tibia but not in the femur. In pooling data from the femur and tibia there was a significant difference. The EXP2 implants failed to insert fully and demonstrated a lower RFA value than may have been expected due to the exposed threads, although this difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions: The results from the present study showed that 1° of taper results in a better primary stability compared with the standard Brånemark design. There was no evidence that the tapered design caused negative bone tissue reactions. All the implants gained in stability during the healing period. Résumé L'étude présente a été effectuée pour analyser la performance mécanique et les caractéristiques de stabilité primaire et secondaire d'implants endoosseux en titane avec un taper (fuselé) 1° (EXP1) et 2 (EXP 2) comparés au modèle ad modum Branemark® standard. Une paire d'implants contrôles et un EXP1 de 10 mm ont été placés dans les condyles fémoraux de six lapins. Des paires d'implants contrôles et EXP1 de 6 mm et des implants contrôles et EXP2 de 6 mm ont été placés dans les métaphyses tibiales. Les implants contrôles utilisés avaient un diamètre standard de 4 mm, la même longueur que les implants tests. Lors du placement, des mesures de force d'insertion (IT) et d'analyse de fréquence de résonnance (RFA) ont été effectuées. Six semaines après l'opération lorsque les animaux ont été euthanasiés, les mesures RFA et les forces d'enlèvement (RT) ont été relevées. Lors du placement un IT significativement plus important a été nécessaire pour insérer les implants EXP1 comparé au contrôle. Les valeurs RFA étaient significativement plus importantes pour les implants EXP1 placés dans le tibia mais pas dans le fémur. En rassemblant les données du fémur et du tibia il y avait une différence significative. Les implants EXP2 ne parvenaient pas àêtre insérés à fond et ont montré une valeur RFA inférieure qui n'était pas inattendue vu les filetages exposés bien que ces différences n'étaient pas statistiquement significatives. Les résultats de l'étude présente ont montré que le taper 1 résultait en une stabilité primaire supérieure comparé au modèle ad modum Branemark® standard. Il n'y avait aucun signe que ce nouveau modèle causait des réactions tissulaires osseuses négatives. Tous les implants ont gagné en stabilité durant leur période de guérison. Zusammenfassung Ziele: Die hier vorgestellte Studie hatte zum Ziel, das mechanische Verhalten und die Charakteristika von Primär- und Sekundärstabilität bei enossalen Implantaten mit einer Gewindeneigung von 1° (EXP1) und von 2° (EXP2) zu untersuchen. Man verglich die Daten mit dem Standarddesign von Brånemark (Nobel Biocare AB, Gothenburg, Schweden). Material und Methode: Man implantierte ein Päärchen von 10mm-Implantaten (EXP1 und Kontrollimplantat) in die Femurkondylen von 6 Kaninchen. Zwei weitere Päärchen von 6mm-Implantaten (EXP1 und Kontrollimplantat, sowie EXP2 und Kontrollimplantat) implantierte man in die Metaphyse der Tibia. Bei den Kontrollimplantaten handelte es sich um Standardtypen von Brånemark mit einem Durchmesser von 4 Millimetern und derselben Länge wie die Testimplantate. Bei der Implantation mass man die Kraft, die es zu Eindrehen der Implantate brauchte (IT) und führte Messungen mit der Resonanzfrequenzanalyse (RFA) durch. Sechs Wochen nach der Operation wurden die Tiere geopfert, die RFA erneut durchgeführt und anschliessend der Ausdrehwiderstand (RT) bestimmt. Resultate: Bei der Implantation brauchte es signifikant grössere IT um die EXP-Implantate einzusetzen, als bei den Kontrollimplantaten. Die RFA-Werte waren bei den EXP1-Implantaten, die in die Tibia geschraubt worden waren, signifikant höher. Dies gilt aber nicht für die in den Femur geschraubten Implantate. Wurden die Daten vom Femur mit denen der Tibia verglichen, so erkannte man signifikante Unterschiede. Die EXP2-Implantate konnten nicht vollständig inseriert werden und zeigten auch tiefere RFA-Werte, als man den freiliegenden Schraubenwindungen entsprechend erwarten könnte. Diese Unterschiede waren aber nicht statistisch signifikant. Zusammenfassung: Die Resultate dieser Studie zeigten, das Schraubenwindungen mit 1° Steigung verglichen mit dem Standarddesign von Brånemark eine bessere Primärstabilität erzielten. Man fand andererseits keine Beweise, dass sich dieses neue Design der Schraubenwindungen negativ auf die Reaktion des Knochengewebes auswirkt. Alle Implantate gewannen während in der Heilphase an Stabilität dazu. Resumen Objetivos: El estudio presentado se diseñó para analizar el rendimiento mecánico y las características de estabilidad primaria y secundaria de implantes endoóseos de titanio con 1o (EXP1) y 2o (EXP 2) de autoroscado al compararlos con el diseño estándar de Brånemark (Nobel Biocare AB, Gothenburg, Suecia). Material y Métodos: Se colocó una pareja de implantes de 10 mm EXP1 y de control en los cóndilos femorales de 6 conejos. Se colocaron pareja de implantes de 6 mm EXP1 y de control y de 6 mm EXP2 y de control en la metáfisis tibial. Los implantes de control utilizados fueron Brånemark estándar de 4 mm de diámetro. A la colocación, se llevaron a cabo mediciones del torque de inserción (IT) y del análisis de la frecuencia de resonancia (RFA). Los animales se sacrificaron a las seis semanas de la operación, y se tomaron medidas del torque de remoción (RT). Resultados: Al colocarse, se necesitó un IT significativamente mas alto para insertar los implantes EXP en comparación con los de control. Los valores RFA fueron significativamente mas altos para implantes EXP1 colocados en la tibia pero no en el fémur. Confrontando los datos del fémur y de la tibia apareció una diferencia significativa. Los implantes EXP2 fracasaron en insertarse completamente y demostraron un menor valor de RFA del que se podía esperar debido a la exposición de las roscas, aunque esta diferencia no fue estadísticamente significativa. Conclusiones: Los resultados del presente estudio mostraron que 1o de autoroscado resultan en una mejor estabilidad primaria comparada con el diseño estándar de Brånemark. No hubo evidencia de que el diseño de autoroscado causara reacciones negativas en el tejido óseo. Todos los implantes ganaron estabilidad durante el periodo de cicatrización. [source]