Effects of the Application Local Zoledronic Acid On Different Dental Implants in Rats On Osseointegration.

Objective: Recently, a lot of research has been done around the world to popularize the osseointegration of dental implants. In this study, it was investigated the effect of local zoledronic acid application on implants with machined (MAC), resorbable blast materials (RBM), sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) surface implants integrated in rat tibias. Methodology: A total of 60 female Wistar rats weighing between 270 and 300 g were used in the study. The rats were passing divided into six classes: controls; MAC (n = 10), RBM (n = 10), SLA (n = 10), and local zoledronic acid (LZA) applied groups; LZA-MAC (n = 10), LZA-RBM (n=10) and LZA-SLA (n = 10) and implants were surgically placement into rat tibias in general anesthesia. After a four-week experimental period, the biomechanical bone implant connection level was determined with reverse torque analysis. Results: Osseointegration levels were detected highly in SLA and RBM surface compared with the machined surfaced implants in both control and treatment groups (p < 0.05). Additionally, local application of zoledronic acid in both three groups; implants increased the biomechanic osseointegration level compared with the controls (p < 0.05). Conclusion: In this research, we observe that the local application of the zoledronic acid could increase the osseointegration, and RBM and SLA surface could be better than machined surfaced implants in terms of bone implant connection. In addition, local application of zoledronic acid may be a safer method than systemic application.

Osseointegration Levels of Implants Placed With Allogenic and Xenogenic Bone Ring: An Experimental Biomechanical Analysis.

This in vivo study aimed to do a biomechanical analysis of the early period bone-implant connection of titanium implants simultaneously inserted with xsenogenic and allogenic bone ring. In this study, 28 Sprague Dawley female rats were used. Four rats were killed to obtain an allogenic bone ring, and after this, the remaining rats were divided into control (n=8), xsenogenic (n=8), and allogenic (n=8) bone ring groups. Titanium-machined surfaced implants were integrated right tibias of the rats. In controls, only implants were integrated into right tibias. In the greft groups, the implants were integrated simultaneously with bone rings. After 2 weeks of the experimental period, the rats were killed ,and titanium implants and surrounding bone tissues were removed for biomechanic analysis. After biomechanical reverse torque analysis bone-implant connection was determined as Newton/cm 2 ; in controls 3.26 (1.2 to 4.5), in allogenic ring group 3.37 (2 to 4.4), in xsenogenic ring group 5.93 (2.8 to 10). Statistically significant differences were not detected between the groups ( P >0.05). Within the limitation of this study, both allogenic and xsenogenic bone grafts could be successfully used in bone augmentation in implant surgery.

Comparison of Osseointegration of Five Different Surfaced Titanium Implants.

The topography, chemical features, surface charge, and hydrophilic nature of titanium implant surfaces are crucial factors for successful osseointegration. This study aimed to investigate the bone implant contact (BIC) ratio of titanium dental implants with different surface modification techniques using the rat femoral bone model. Sandblasted and acid washed (SL-AW), sandblasted (SL), resorbable blast material (RBM), microarc (MA), and sandblasted and microarc (SL-MA) surfaces were compared in this study. Forty male Sprague-Dawley rats were used in this study. The rats were divided into 5 equal groups (n = 8), and totally 40 implants were integrated into the right femoral bones of the rats. The rats were sacrificed 12 weeks after the surgical integration of the implants. The implant surface-bone tissue interaction was directly observed by a light microscope, and BIC ratios were measured after the nondecalcified histological procedures. Bone implant contact ratios were determined as follows: SL-AW: 59.26 ±â€Š14.36%, SL: 66.01 ±â€Š9.63%, RBM: 63.53 ±â€Š11.23%, MA: 65.51 ±â€Š10.3%, and SL-MA: 68.62 ±â€Š6.6%. No statistically significant differences were found among the 5 different surfaced titanium implant groups (P > 0.05). Our results show that various implant surface modification techniques can provide favorable bone responses to the BIC of dental implants.