The effect of osseodensification drilling for endosteal implants with different surface treatments: A study in sheep

Bradley Lahens, Christopher D. Lopez, Rodrigo F. Neiva, Michelle M. Bowers, Ryo Jimbo, Estevam A. Bonfante, Jonathan Morcos, Lukasz Witek, Nick Tovar, Paulo Coelho

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of osseodensification drilling on the stability and osseointegration of machine-cut and acid-etched endosteal implants in low-density bone. Twelve sheep received six implants inserted into the ilium, bilaterally (n = 36 acid-etched, and n = 36 as-machined). Individual animals received three implants of each surface, placed via different surgical techniques: (1) subtractive regular-drilling (R): 2.0 mm pilot, 3.2 and 3.8 mm twist drills); (2) osseodensification clockwise-drilling (CW): Densah Bur (Versah, Jackson, MI) 2.0 mm pilot, 2.8, and 3.8 mm multifluted tapered burs; and (3) osseodensification counterclockwise-drilling (CCW) Densah Bur 2.0 mm pilot, 2.8 mm, and 3.8 mm multifluted tapered burs. Insertion torque was higher in the CCW and CW-drilling compared to the R-drilling (p < 0.001). Bone-to-implant contact (BIC) was significantly higher for CW (p = 0.024) and CCW-drilling (p = 0.006) compared to the R-drilling technique. For CCW-osseodensification-drilling, no statistical difference between the acid-etched and machine-cut implants at both time points was observed for BIC and BAFO (bone-area-fraction-occupancy). Resorbed bone and bone forming precursors, preosteoblasts, were observed at 3-weeks. At 12-weeks, new bone formation was observed in all groups extending to the trabecular region. In low-density bone, endosteal implants inserted via osseodensification-drilling presented higher stability and no osseointegration impairments compared to subtractive regular-drilling technique, regardless of evaluation time or implant surface.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Biomedical Materials Research - Part B Applied Biomaterials
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Surface treatment
Drilling
Bone
Acids
Animals
Torque

Keywords

  • bone
  • histologic
  • implant
  • insertion torque
  • osseodensification

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biomaterials
  • Biomedical Engineering

Cite this

The effect of osseodensification drilling for endosteal implants with different surface treatments : A study in sheep. / Lahens, Bradley; Lopez, Christopher D.; Neiva, Rodrigo F.; Bowers, Michelle M.; Jimbo, Ryo; Bonfante, Estevam A.; Morcos, Jonathan; Witek, Lukasz; Tovar, Nick; Coelho, Paulo.

In: Journal of Biomedical Materials Research - Part B Applied Biomaterials, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lahens, Bradley ; Lopez, Christopher D. ; Neiva, Rodrigo F. ; Bowers, Michelle M. ; Jimbo, Ryo ; Bonfante, Estevam A. ; Morcos, Jonathan ; Witek, Lukasz ; Tovar, Nick ; Coelho, Paulo. / The effect of osseodensification drilling for endosteal implants with different surface treatments : A study in sheep. In: Journal of Biomedical Materials Research - Part B Applied Biomaterials. 2018.
@article{cb1946f9c39d4e3d9536323618671687,
title = "The effect of osseodensification drilling for endosteal implants with different surface treatments: A study in sheep",
abstract = "This study investigated the effects of osseodensification drilling on the stability and osseointegration of machine-cut and acid-etched endosteal implants in low-density bone. Twelve sheep received six implants inserted into the ilium, bilaterally (n = 36 acid-etched, and n = 36 as-machined). Individual animals received three implants of each surface, placed via different surgical techniques: (1) subtractive regular-drilling (R): 2.0 mm pilot, 3.2 and 3.8 mm twist drills); (2) osseodensification clockwise-drilling (CW): Densah Bur (Versah, Jackson, MI) 2.0 mm pilot, 2.8, and 3.8 mm multifluted tapered burs; and (3) osseodensification counterclockwise-drilling (CCW) Densah Bur 2.0 mm pilot, 2.8 mm, and 3.8 mm multifluted tapered burs. Insertion torque was higher in the CCW and CW-drilling compared to the R-drilling (p < 0.001). Bone-to-implant contact (BIC) was significantly higher for CW (p = 0.024) and CCW-drilling (p = 0.006) compared to the R-drilling technique. For CCW-osseodensification-drilling, no statistical difference between the acid-etched and machine-cut implants at both time points was observed for BIC and BAFO (bone-area-fraction-occupancy). Resorbed bone and bone forming precursors, preosteoblasts, were observed at 3-weeks. At 12-weeks, new bone formation was observed in all groups extending to the trabecular region. In low-density bone, endosteal implants inserted via osseodensification-drilling presented higher stability and no osseointegration impairments compared to subtractive regular-drilling technique, regardless of evaluation time or implant surface.",
keywords = "bone, histologic, implant, insertion torque, osseodensification",
author = "Bradley Lahens and Lopez, {Christopher D.} and Neiva, {Rodrigo F.} and Bowers, {Michelle M.} and Ryo Jimbo and Bonfante, {Estevam A.} and Jonathan Morcos and Lukasz Witek and Nick Tovar and Paulo Coelho",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/jbm.b.34154",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Biomedical Materials Research",
issn = "1552-4973",
publisher = "Heterocorporation",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The effect of osseodensification drilling for endosteal implants with different surface treatments

T2 - A study in sheep

AU - Lahens, Bradley

AU - Lopez, Christopher D.

AU - Neiva, Rodrigo F.

AU - Bowers, Michelle M.

AU - Jimbo, Ryo

AU - Bonfante, Estevam A.

AU - Morcos, Jonathan

AU - Witek, Lukasz

AU - Tovar, Nick

AU - Coelho, Paulo

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - This study investigated the effects of osseodensification drilling on the stability and osseointegration of machine-cut and acid-etched endosteal implants in low-density bone. Twelve sheep received six implants inserted into the ilium, bilaterally (n = 36 acid-etched, and n = 36 as-machined). Individual animals received three implants of each surface, placed via different surgical techniques: (1) subtractive regular-drilling (R): 2.0 mm pilot, 3.2 and 3.8 mm twist drills); (2) osseodensification clockwise-drilling (CW): Densah Bur (Versah, Jackson, MI) 2.0 mm pilot, 2.8, and 3.8 mm multifluted tapered burs; and (3) osseodensification counterclockwise-drilling (CCW) Densah Bur 2.0 mm pilot, 2.8 mm, and 3.8 mm multifluted tapered burs. Insertion torque was higher in the CCW and CW-drilling compared to the R-drilling (p < 0.001). Bone-to-implant contact (BIC) was significantly higher for CW (p = 0.024) and CCW-drilling (p = 0.006) compared to the R-drilling technique. For CCW-osseodensification-drilling, no statistical difference between the acid-etched and machine-cut implants at both time points was observed for BIC and BAFO (bone-area-fraction-occupancy). Resorbed bone and bone forming precursors, preosteoblasts, were observed at 3-weeks. At 12-weeks, new bone formation was observed in all groups extending to the trabecular region. In low-density bone, endosteal implants inserted via osseodensification-drilling presented higher stability and no osseointegration impairments compared to subtractive regular-drilling technique, regardless of evaluation time or implant surface.

AB - This study investigated the effects of osseodensification drilling on the stability and osseointegration of machine-cut and acid-etched endosteal implants in low-density bone. Twelve sheep received six implants inserted into the ilium, bilaterally (n = 36 acid-etched, and n = 36 as-machined). Individual animals received three implants of each surface, placed via different surgical techniques: (1) subtractive regular-drilling (R): 2.0 mm pilot, 3.2 and 3.8 mm twist drills); (2) osseodensification clockwise-drilling (CW): Densah Bur (Versah, Jackson, MI) 2.0 mm pilot, 2.8, and 3.8 mm multifluted tapered burs; and (3) osseodensification counterclockwise-drilling (CCW) Densah Bur 2.0 mm pilot, 2.8 mm, and 3.8 mm multifluted tapered burs. Insertion torque was higher in the CCW and CW-drilling compared to the R-drilling (p < 0.001). Bone-to-implant contact (BIC) was significantly higher for CW (p = 0.024) and CCW-drilling (p = 0.006) compared to the R-drilling technique. For CCW-osseodensification-drilling, no statistical difference between the acid-etched and machine-cut implants at both time points was observed for BIC and BAFO (bone-area-fraction-occupancy). Resorbed bone and bone forming precursors, preosteoblasts, were observed at 3-weeks. At 12-weeks, new bone formation was observed in all groups extending to the trabecular region. In low-density bone, endosteal implants inserted via osseodensification-drilling presented higher stability and no osseointegration impairments compared to subtractive regular-drilling technique, regardless of evaluation time or implant surface.

KW - bone

KW - histologic

KW - implant

KW - insertion torque

KW - osseodensification

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052456580&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85052456580&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/jbm.b.34154

DO - 10.1002/jbm.b.34154

M3 - Article

C2 - 30080320

AN - SCOPUS:85052456580

JO - Journal of Biomedical Materials Research

JF - Journal of Biomedical Materials Research

SN - 1552-4973

ER -