Early bone response to dual acid-etched and machined dental implants placed in the posterior maxilla: a histologic and histomorphometric human study
FG Mangano, JT Pires, JA Shibli, E Mijiritsky… - Implant …, 2017 - journals.lww.com
FG Mangano, JT Pires, JA Shibli, E Mijiritsky, G Iezzi, A Piattelli, C Mangano
Implant dentistry, 2017•journals.lww.comPurpose: To compare the early bone response to implants with dual acid-etched (DAE) and
machined (MA) surface, when placed in the posterior human maxilla. Materials and
Methods: Fourteen patients received 2 implants in the posterior maxilla: 1 DAE and 1 MA.
After 2 months, the implants were retrieved for histologic/histomorphometric evaluation. The
bone-to-implant contact (BIC%), bone density in the threaded area (BDTA%), and the bone
density (BD%) were calculated. The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test was used to …
machined (MA) surface, when placed in the posterior human maxilla. Materials and
Methods: Fourteen patients received 2 implants in the posterior maxilla: 1 DAE and 1 MA.
After 2 months, the implants were retrieved for histologic/histomorphometric evaluation. The
bone-to-implant contact (BIC%), bone density in the threaded area (BDTA%), and the bone
density (BD%) were calculated. The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test was used to …
Abstract
Purpose:
To compare the early bone response to implants with dual acid-etched (DAE) and machined (MA) surface, when placed in the posterior human maxilla.
Materials and Methods:
Fourteen patients received 2 implants in the posterior maxilla: 1 DAE and 1 MA. After 2 months, the implants were retrieved for histologic/histomorphometric evaluation. The bone-to-implant contact (BIC%), bone density in the threaded area (BDTA%), and the bone density (BD%) were calculated. The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test was used to evaluate differences (BIC%, BDTA%, and BD%) between the surfaces.
Results:
In the MA implants, a mean (±SD) BIC%, BDTA%, and BD% of 21.76 (±12.79), 28.58 (±16.91), and 21.54 (±11.67), respectively, was reported. In the DAE implants, a mean (±SD) BIC%, BDTA%, and BD% of 37.49 (±29.51), 30.59 (±21.78), and 31.60 (±18.06), respectively, was reported. Although the mean BIC% of DAE implants value was almost double than that of MA implants, no significant differences were found between the 2 groups with regard to BIC%(P= 0.198) and with regard to BDTA%(P= 0.778) and BD%(P= 0.124).
Conclusions:
The DAE surface increased the periimplant endosseous healing properties in the native bone of the posterior maxilla.
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins以上显示的是最相近的搜索结果。 查看全部搜索结果