PRİMER STABİLİZASYON OLAN VE OLMAYAN İMPLANTLARDA KEMİK İMPLANT KAYNAŞMASININ BİYOMEKANİK İNCELENMESİ: İN VİVO BİR ÇALIŞMA

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 28 Sayı: 2, 188 - 193, 22.04.2018

Serkan Dündar , Ömer Çakmak Murat Yavuz Solmaz

https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.418847

Öz

Amaç: Bu
çalışmada rat tibiyalarına yerleştirilen primer stabilite olan ve olmayan
titanyum implantların osseointegrasyonunun biyomekanik incelenmesi
amaçlanmıştır.

Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu
çalışmada kullanılan 42 adet, dişi Spraque Dawley rat 2 gruba ayrıldı. Primer
Stabili- te Olan (PS+) Grup (n=21); 2.5 mm çapında 6 mm uzunluğunda tornalanmış
yüzey titanyum implantlar deneklerin sağ ve sol tibiyalarına primer
stabilizasyon sağlanarak, Primer Stabilite Olmayan (PS-) Grup (n=21); 2.5 mm
çapında 6 mm uzunluğunda titanyum implantlar deneklerin sağ ve sol tibiyalarına
primer stabilizasyon sağlanmaksızın steril şartlarda cerrahi yöntemle
yerleştirildi. Denekler her bir grupta eşit rat olacak şekilde 4. (n=7), 8.
(n=7) ve 12. (n=7) hafta sonunda sakrifiye edildi. İmplantların
biyomekanik analizleri basma testine  tabi tutularak
gerçekleştirildi.

Bulgular:
Kuvvet değerleri PS+ grubunda PS- grubuna göre 4., 8. ve 12. haftaların sonunda
yüksek tespit edildi (P<0.05). PS+ grubunda 4., 8. ve 12. hafta kuvvet
değer- lerinde fark tespit edilmedi (P>0.05). PS- grubunda kuv- vet
değerleri 4. ve 8. haftalar arasında bir fark meydana getirmemişken
(P>0.05), 12. hafta kuvvet değerleri 4. ve 8. haftalara göre yüksek tespit
edidi (P<0.05). Yer değiş- tirme miktarları 4. haftada PS- grubunda PS+
grubundan yüksek tespit edilirken (P<0.05), 8. ve 12. hafta yer de- ğiştirme
değerlerinde gruplar arası bir fark tespit edilmedi (P>0.05).  PS+ grubunun 4., 8. ve 12.haftalarda yer
değiştirme miktarları arasında bir fark tespit edilmezken (P>0.05), PS-
grubunda 4. hafta yer değiştirme değeri 8. ve 12. haftalara göre yüksek tespit
edildi (P<0.05).

Sonuç: Primer
stabilizasyon olan implantlarda osseoin- tegrasyon primer stabilite olmayan
implantlara göre daha iyi düzeyde elde edildi. Primer stabilite olmadan da
osseointegrasyon sağlanabilir.

Anahtar
Kelimeler: Primer stabilizasyon, osseointeg, rasyon, dental implant, rat tibiyası, biyomekanik

BIOMECHANIC EVALUATION
OF THE BONE IMPLANT CONNECTION OF THE PRIMARY AND NON-PRIMARY STABILIZED TITANIUM
IMPLANTS: AN IN VIVO STUDY

ABSTRACT

 

Aim: In
this study it was aimed to that biomechanic evaluation of the primary
stabilized and non-primary stabilized titanium implant osseointegration in rat
tibias.

Materials and Methods: In
this study, 42 female Spraque Dawley rat were used and diveded 2 groups: Primer
stabilized group (PS+) (n=21); 2.5 diameter and 6 mm long titanium implant was
integrated in rat tibias both left and right side with primary stabilization. Non
primary stabilized (PS-) (n=21) group; 2.5 diameter and 6 mm long titanium
implant was integrated in rat tibias both left and right side without primary
stabilization. Surgical procedure was done under steril condition. Rats were
sacrified in 4. (n=7), 8. (n=7) and 12. (n=7) weeks in equal number in each
group. Biomechanical analysis of the implants were done with
compression test

Results: Force
magnitudes detected higly compared in PS+ compared PS- in 4., 8 and 12. weeks
(P<0.05). In PS+ any difference was not detected in forces at 4., 8. and 12.
weeks (P>0.05). In PS- group; difference was detected in forces at 12. week
when compared 4. and 8. weeks (P<0.05). Displacement in PS- group detected
highly compared with PS+ in 4. week (P<0.05), but in 8. and 12. weeks any
difference was not detected between two groups (P>0.05). any difference was
not detected at 4., 8. and 12. weeks in displacement values in PS+ group
(P>0.05). But in PS- group displacement values was detected highly in 4.
week compared 8. and 12. Weeks (P>0.05).

Conclusion:
Osseointegration in primary stabilized implants was detected better than
non-primary stabilized implants. Osseointagration could enhance without primary
stabilization.  

Keywords: Primary stabilization, osseointegration, dental
implant, rat tibia, biomechanic

Anahtar Kelimeler

Primer stabilizasyon, osseointeg, rasyon, dental implant, rat tibiyası

Kaynakça

• 1. Eltas A, Dundar S, Uzun İH, Malkoç MA. Dental implant başarısının ve hasta profilinin değerlendiril- mesi: retrospektif bir çalışma. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg 2013; 21: 1-8.
• 2. Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, Behneke A, Behneke N, Hirt HP, Belser UC, Lang NP. Long term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 1997;8: 161-72.
• 3. Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL, Sammartino G, Galindo-Moreno P, Trisi P, Steigmann M, Rebaudi A, Palti A, Pikos MA, Schwartz-Arad D, Choukroun J,Gutierrez-Perez JL, Marenzi G, Valavanis DK. Implant success, survival and failure: The International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Implant Dent 2008; 17: 5-15.
• 4. Javed F, Romanos GE. The role of primary stability for successful immediate loading of dental implants. A literature review. J Dent 2010;38:612–20.
• 5. Lioubavina-Hack N, Lang NP, Karring T. Significance of primary stability for osseointegration of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006; 17:244-50.
• 6. Davies JE. Understanding peri-implant endosseous healing. J Dent Educ 2003; 67:932-49.
• 7. Berglundh T, Abrahamsson I, Lang NP, Lindhe J. De novo alveolar bone formation adjacent to endosseous implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003; 14:251-62. 8. Davies JE. Mechanisms of endosseous integration. Review. Int J Prosthodont. 1998;11:391-401.
• 9. Sivolella S, Bressan E, Salata LA, Urrutia ZA, Lang NP, Botticelli D. Osteogenesis at implants without primary bone contact - an experimental study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:542-9.
• 10. Akimoto K, Becker W, Persson R, Baker DA, Rohrer MD, O'Neal RB. Evaluation of titanium implants placed into simulated extraction sockets: a study in dogs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:351-60.
• 11. Knox R, Caudill R, Meffert R. Histologic evaluation of dental endosseous implants placed in surgically created extraction defects. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1991;11:364-75.
• 12. Yurttutan ME, Kestane R, Keskin A, Dereci O. Biomechanical evaluation of oversized drilling on implant stability - an experimental study in sheep. J Pak Med Assoc 2016;66:147-50. - 13. Branemark R, Ohrnell LO, Nilsson P, Thomsen P. Biomechanical characterization of osseointegration during healing: an experimental in vivo study in the rat. Biomaterials 1997;18:969-78.
• 14. Ogawa T, Ozawa S, Shih JH, Ryu KH, Sukotjo C, Yang JM, Nishimura I. Biomechanical evaluation of osseous implants having different surface topographies in rats. J Dent Res 2000;79:1857-63.
• 15. Zhou H, Hou Y, Zhu Z, Xiao W, Xu Q, Li L, Li X, Chen W. Effects of Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound on Implant Osseointegration in Ovariectomized Rats. J Ultrasound Med 2016;35:747-54.
• 16. Lu L, Zhijian H, Lei L, Wenchuan C, Zhimin Z. Berberine in Combination with Insulin Has Additive Effects on Titanium Implants Osseointegration in Diabetes Mellitus Rats. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med 2015:824259.
• 17. Pontes AE, de Toledo CT, Garcia VG, Ribeiro FS, Sakakura CE. Torque Analysis of a Triple Acid-Etched Titanium Implant Surface. Scientific World Journal 2015:819879.
• 18. Jung UW, Kim S, Kim YH, Cha JK, Lee IS, Choi SH. Osseointegration of dental implants installed without mechanical engagement: a histometric analysis in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:1297-301.
• 19. Jung UW, Kim S, Lee IK, Kim MS, Lee JS, Kim HJ. Secondary stability of microthickness hydroxyapatite-coated dental implants installed without primary stability in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:1169-74.
• 20. Carlsson L, Rostlund T, Albrektsson B, Albrektsson T. Implant fixation improved by close fit. Cylindrical implant-bone interface studied in rabbits. Acta Orthop Scand 1988;59:272-5.