Histomorphometrical and molecular evaluation of endosseous dental implants sites in humans: correlation with clinical and radiographic aspects.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the correlations between clinical-radiographical aspects and histomorphometric-molecular parameters of endosseous dental implant sites in humans. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study sample consisted of bone implant sites from the jawbones of 32 volunteers, which were classified according to two different systems: (1) based only on periapical and panoramic images (PP); (2) as proposed by Lekholm & Zarb (L&Z). Bone biopsies were removed using trephine during the first drilling for implant placement. Samples were stained with haematoxylin-eosin (HE), and histomorphometric analysis was performed to obtain the following parameters: trabecular thickness (Tb.Th), trabecular number, bone volume density (BV/TV), bone specific surface (BS/BV), bone surface density and trabecular separation (Tb.Sp). In addition, immunohistochemistry analysis was performed on bone tissue samples for the proteins, Receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B (RANK), RANK ligand (RANKL), osteoprotegerin (OPG) and Osteocalcin (OC). Also, the determination of the relative levels of gene expression was performed using Reverse transcription-real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR). RESULTS: PP and L&Z classification systems revealed a moderate correlation with BV/TV, BS/BV, Tb.Th and Tb.Sp. L&Z's system identified differences among bone types when BV/TV, BS/BV, Tb.Th and Tb.Sp were compared. A weak correlation between PP/L&Z classifications and the expression of bone metabolism regulators (RANK, RANKL, OPG e OC) was found. The analysis of mRNA expression showed no difference between the bone types evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that PP and L&Z subjective bone-type classification systems are related to histomorphometric aspects. These data may contribute to the validation of these classifications. Bone remodelling regulatory molecules do not seem to influence morphological aspects of the jawbone .

Ambiguity in bone tissue characteristics as presented in studies on dental implant planning and placement: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To survey definitions of bone tissue characteristics and methods of assessing them in studies of dental implant planning and placement. MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY: Three databases were searched using specified indexing terms. Three reviewers selected from the titles and retrieved abstracts in accordance with inclusion and exclusion criteria. Descriptions of bone tissue characteristics (bone quality, density and quantity) used before or during dental implant placement were searched for and categorized. RESULTS: The search yielded 488 titles. One hundred and fort-nine publications were selected and read in full text. One hundred and eight were considered relevant. There were many different definitions and classification systems for bone tissue characteristics and examination protocols. Approximately two-third of the included publications reported the Lekholm & Zarb classification system for bone quality and quantity. However, only four studies implemented the Lekholm & Zarb system as originally proposed. A few publications described bone quality in accordance with the Misch or Trisi and Rao classifications systems. Assessment methods were often described only briefly (or not at all in one-fifth of the publications). Only one study presented the diagnostic accuracy of the assessment method, while only two presented observer performance. CONCLUSION: The differing definitions and classification systems applied to dental implant planning and placement make it impossible to compare the results of various studies, particularly with respect to whether bone quality or quantity affect treatment outcomes. A consistent classification system for bone tissue characteristics is needed, as well as an appropriate description of bone tissue assessment methods, their diagnostic accuracy and observer performance.