A New Material For Detecting Submerged Implants: An Animal Experiment

Year 2023, Volume: 9 Issue: 4, 679 - 695, 29.10.2023

Eren Yılmaz , Emel Bulut , Nilüfer Kuruca , Tolga Güvenç

https://doi.org/10.19127/mbsjohs.1350411

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Objective: There are difficulties in determining the location of submerged implants when cover screws and healing screws are to be replaced. Because of this, a new implant cover screw has been designed. The purpose of this study was to investigate the properties of a novel implant cover screws in rabbits.
Methods: 10 New Zealand White rabbits were randomly divided into two groups. Diastema regions behind the incisor teeth were used for the placement of cover screws. In the control group, the screws (n=20) that received no processing were placed whereas, in the experimental group, the screws (n=20) that top surfaces were coated with europium and dysprosium doped strontium aluminate were placed to the diastema regions. Animals were sacrificed after 6 weeks. Dental LED curing light was applied to the oral mucosa regions in which screws were placed in the experimental group just after sacrification and the visibility of the screws was evaluated. To determine the biocompatibility of the coated screws, oral mucosas which contacted with the screws, livers and kidneys were removed and examined histopathologically.
Results: After light application, only the screws in the upper jaws of the experimental group became visible (n=10). Histopathological examinations performed on the kidneys, livers and oral mucosa tissues which contacted with the screws. There were no significant differences between the experimental and control groups regarding these tissues.
Conclusion: According to the results of this study, it can be concluded that the titanium implant cover screws coated with europium and dysprosium doped strontium aluminate were biocompatible for rabbits.

Keywords

Biocompatibility, Cover screw, Dental implant, Rabbit, Strontium aluminate

Project Number

PYO.DIS.1904.17.015

References

• Li Y, Gecevicius M, Qiu J. Long persistent phosphors--from fundamentals to applications. Chem Soc Rev 2016;45:2090-136.
• Montes-Frausto JB, Juarez-Moreno K, Can-Uc B, Hirata-Flores GA. Synthesis and cytotoxic effects of SrAl2O4 persistent luminescence nanoparticles co-doped with Eu2+/Dy3+ ions. Optical Materials Express 2016;6:1488-99.
• Alumilite Corporation. 2015. Strontium-Dysprosium-Europium-Aluminate safety data sheet https://www.alumilite.com/PDFs/SDS/powders/Phosphorescent-Powder.pdf.
• Yen WM, Shionoya S, Yamamoto H. Phosphor Handbook 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2007.
• Branemark PI. Osseointegration and its experimental background. J Prosthet Dent 1983;50:399-410.
• Duyck J, Ronold HJ, Van Oosterwyck H, Naert I, Vander Sloten J, Ellingsen JE. The influence of static and dynamic loading on marginal bone reactions around osseointegrated implants: an animal experimental study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:207-18.
• Klokkevold PR, Nishimura RD, Adachi M, Caputo A. Osseointegration enhanced by chemical etching of the titanium surface. A torque removal study in the rabbit. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:442-7.
• Sanchez-Siles M, Munoz-Camara D, Salazar-Sanchez N, Camacho-Alonso F, Calvo-Guirado JL. Crestal bone loss around submerged and non-submerged implants during the osseointegration phase with different healing abutment designs: a randomized prospective clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018;29:808-12.
• Barber HD, Seckinger RJ, Silverstein K, Abughazaleh K. Comparison of soft tissue healing and osseointegration of IMZ implants placed in one-stage and two-stage techniques: a pilot study. Implant Dent 1996;5:11-4.
• Ericsson I, Randow K, Nilner K, Petersson A. Some clinical and radiographical features of submerged and non-submerged titanium implants. A 5-year follow-up study. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:422-6.
• Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T, Moon IS, Lindhe J. Peri-implant tissues at submerged and non-submerged titanium implants. J Clin Periodontol 1999;26:600-7.
• Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Dula K, Lang NP. Clinical experience with one-stage, non-submerged dental implants. Adv Dent Res 1999;13:153-61.
• Becker W, Becker BE, Ricci A, Bahat O, Rosenberg E, Rose LF, et al. A prospective multicenter clinical trial comparing one- and two-stage titanium screw-shaped fixtures with one-stage plasma-sprayed solid-screw fixtures. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2000;2:159-65.
• Cecchinato D, Olsson C, Lindhe J. Submerged or non-submerged healing of endosseous implants to be used in the rehabilitation of partially dentate patients. J Clin Periodontol 2004;31:299-308.
• Engquist B, Astrand P, Anzen B, Dahlgren S, Engquist E, Feldmann H, et al. Simplified methods of implant treatment in the edentulous lower jaw: a 3-year follow-up report of a controlled prospective study of one-stage versus two-stage surgery and early loading. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005;7:95-104.
• Cordaro L, Torsello F, Roccuzzo M. Clinical outcome of submerged vs. non-submerged implants placed in fresh extraction sockets. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:1307-13.
• Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Chew YS, Coulthard P, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: 1- versus 2-stage implant placement. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009:CD006698.
• Tallarico M, Vaccarella A, Marzi GC. Clinical and radiological outcomes of 1- versus 2-stage implant placement: 1-year results of a randomised clinical trial. Eur J Oral Implantol 2011;4:13-20.
• Torkzaban P, Arabi SR, Roshanaei G, Rostami M, Soheilifar S. A Comparative Study of Clinical Parameters in Submerged and Non submerged Implants. J Clin Diagn Res 2015;9:ZC26-9.
• Gheisari R, Eatemadi H, Alavian A. Comparison of the Marginal Bone Loss in One-stage versus Two-stage Implant Surgery. J Dent (Shiraz) 2017;18:272-6.
• Paul S, Petsch M, Held U. Modeling of Crestal Bone After Submerged vs Transmucosal Implant Placement: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2017;32:1039-50.
• Flores-Guillen J, Alvarez-Novoa C, Barbieri G, Martin C, Sanz M. Five-year outcomes of a randomized clinical trial comparing bone-level implants with either submerged or transmucosal healing. J Clin Periodontol 2018;45:125-35.
• Gehrke SA, Braganca LK, Velasco-Ortega E, Calvo-Guirado JL. Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs. Int J Implant Dent 2018;4:5.
• Martinez-Gonzalez JM, Martin-Ares M, Martinez-Rodriguez N, Barona-Dorado C, Sanz-Alonso J, Cortes-Breton-Brinkmann J, et al. Comparison of peri-implant soft tissues in submerged versus transmucosal healing: A split mouth prospective immunohistochemical study. Arch Oral Biol 2018;90:61-6.
• Moustafa Ali RM, Alqutaibi AY, El-Din Gomaa AS, Abdallah MF. Effect of Submerged vs Nonsubmerged Implant Placement Protocols on Implant Failure and Marginal Bone Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int J Prosthodont 2018;31:15-22.
• Troiano G, Lo Russo L, Canullo L, Ciavarella D, Lo Muzio L, Laino L. Early and late implant failure of submerged versus non-submerged implant healing: A systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. J Clin Periodontol 2018;45:613-23.
• Wu S, Wu X, Shrestha R, Lin J, Feng Z, Liu Y, et al. Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes of Submerged and Nonsubmerged Bone-Level Implants with Internal Hexagonal Connections in Immediate Implantation: A 5-Year Retrospective Study. J Prosthodont 2018;27:101-7.
• Yılmaz E, Bulut E. 2018. One- or two-stage implant surgery preferences of dentists. https://forms.gle/XGVv6n1jgbtPQZdo7.
• Soylu E, Gonen ZB, Alkan A. A New Detection Method for Submerged Implants: Oral Tattoo. J Prosthodont 2018;27:361-3.
• Andersson L, Kahnberg KE, Pogrel MA. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 1st ed. Chichester: Wiler Blackwell; 2010.
• Perez-Albacete Martinez C, Vlahovic Z, Scepanovic M, Videnovic G, Barone A, Calvo-Guirado JL. Submerged flapless technique vs. conventional flap approach for implant placement: experimental domestic pig study with 12-month follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res 2016;27:964-8.
• Vlahovic Z, Mihailovic B, Lazic Z, Golubovic M. Comparative radiographic and resonance frequency analyses of the peri-implant tissue after dental implants placement using flap and flapless techniques: an experimental study on domestic pigs. Vojnosanit Pregl 2013;70:586-94.
• Vohra F, Al-Kheraif AA, Almas K, Javed F. Comparison of crestal bone loss around dental implants placed in healed sites using flapped and flapless techniques: a systematic review. J Periodontol 2015;86:185-91.
• Gehrke SA, Perez-Albacete Martinez C, Piattelli A, Shibli JA, Markovic A, Calvo Guirado JL. The influence of three different apical implant designs at stability and osseointegration process: experimental study in rabbits. Clin Oral Implants Res 2017;28:355-61.
• McDannold N, Fossheim SL, Rasmussen H, Martin H, Vykhodtseva N, Hynynen K. Heat-activated liposomal MR contrast agent: initial in vivo results in rabbit liver and kidney. Radiology 2004;230:743-52.
• Okolie NP, Osagie AU. Liver and kidney lesions and associated enzyme changes induced in rabbits by chronic cyanide exposure. Food Chem Toxicol 1999;37:745-50.
• Voss KA, Riley RT, Norred WP, Bacon CW, Meredith FI, Howard PC, et al. An overview of rodent toxicities: liver and kidney effects of fumonisins and Fusarium moniliforme. Environ Health Perspect 2001;109 Suppl 2:259-66.
• Al-Hashem F. Camel’s milk protects against aluminum chloride-induced toxicity in the liver and kidney of white albino rats. Am. J. Biochem. & Biotech. 2009;5(3):98-108.
• Thomson P. Oral Precancer 1st ed. Chichester: Wiler Blackwell; 2012.
• Culjat MO, Choi M, Singh RS, Grundfest WS, Brown ER, White SN. Ultrasound detection of submerged dental implants through soft tissue in a porcine model. J Prosthet Dent 2008;99:218-24..