Comparison between Sandblasted Acid-Etched and Oxidized Titanium Dental Implants: In Vivo Study

dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidade de Santiago de Compostela. Departamento de Anatomía, Produción Animal e Ciencias Clínicas Veterinariasgl
dc.contributor.authorVelasco Ortega, Eugenio
dc.contributor.authorOrtiz García, Iván
dc.contributor.authorJiménez Guerra, Álvaro
dc.contributor.authorMonsalve Guil, Loreto
dc.contributor.authorMuñoz Guzón, Fernando María
dc.contributor.authorPérez, Román A.
dc.contributor.authorGil, F. Javier
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-30T11:50:43Z
dc.date.available2020-03-30T11:50:43Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.description.abstractThe surface modifications of titanium dental implants play important roles in the enhancement of osseointegration. The objective of the present study was to test two different implant surface treatments on a rabbit model to investigate the osseointegration. The tested surfaces were: a) acid-etched surface with sandblasting treatment (SA) and b) an oxidized implant surface (OS). The roughness was measured by an interferometeric microscope with white light and the residual stress of the surfaces was measured with X-ray residual stress Bragg–Bentano diffraction. Six New Zealand white rabbits were used for the in vivo study. Implants with the two different surfaces (SA and OS) were inserted in the femoral bone. After 12 weeks of implantation, histological and histomorphometric analyses of the blocks containing the implants and the surrounding bone were performed. All the implants were correctly implanted and no signs of infection were observed. SA and OS surfaces were both surrounded by newly formed trabeculae. Histomorphometric analysis revealed that the bone–implant contact % (BIC) was higher around the SA implants (53.49 ± 8.46) than around the OS implants (50.94 ± 16.42), although there were no significant statistical differences among them. Both implant surfaces (SA and OS) demonstrated a good bone response with significant amounts of newly formed bone along the implant surface after 12 weeks of implantation. These results confirmed the importance of the topography and physico–chemical properties of dental implants in the osseointegration.gl
dc.description.peerreviewedSIgl
dc.description.sponsorshipThe authors are grateful to the Spanish Government and European Union FEDER by the concession of the project RTI2018-098075-B-C22gl
dc.identifier.citationVelasco-Ortega, E., Ortiz-García, I., Jiménez-Guerra, A., Monsalve-Guil, L., Muñoz-Guzón, F., Perez, R. A., & Gil, F. J. (2019). Comparison between sandblasted acid-etched and oxidized titanium dental implants: in vivo study. International journal of molecular sciences, 20(13), 3267.gl
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/ijms20133267
dc.identifier.essn1422-0067
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10347/20982
dc.language.isoenggl
dc.publisherMDPIgl
dc.relation.projectIDinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/AEI/Plan Estatal de Investigación Científica y Técnica y de Innovación 2017-2020/RTI2018-098075-B-C22/ES/RECUBRIMIENTOS DE BIOMATERIALES DE DOBLE ACCION PARA INFECCIONES BACTERIANAS E INTEGRACION DE TEJIDOS
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20133267gl
dc.rights© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).gl
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accessgl
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectOsseointegrationgl
dc.subjectTitaniumgl
dc.subjectImplant surfacegl
dc.subjectSandblasted surfacegl
dc.subjectAcid-etched surfacegl
dc.subjectOxidized surfacegl
dc.titleComparison between Sandblasted Acid-Etched and Oxidized Titanium Dental Implants: In Vivo Studygl
dc.typejournal articlegl
dc.type.hasVersionVoRgl
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationa80b7053-e349-4aaa-9aa0-fe8dc7043ac2
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoverya80b7053-e349-4aaa-9aa0-fe8dc7043ac2

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
2019_ijoms_velasco_comparisonbetween.pdf
Size:
1.96 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: