Osseointegration in the Absence of Primary Stability: An Experimental Preclinical Mandibular Minipig Overpreparation In Vivo Model

IF 5.3 1区医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Clinical Oral Implants Research Pub Date : 2025-07-23 DOI:10.1111/clr.70006

Thomas Gill, Hansley Ooi, Emre Tezulas, Aviva Petrie, Simon Rawlinson, Mario Roccuzzo, Shakeel Shahdad

{"title":"Osseointegration in the Absence of Primary Stability: An Experimental Preclinical Mandibular Minipig Overpreparation In Vivo Model","authors":"Thomas Gill, Hansley Ooi, Emre Tezulas, Aviva Petrie, Simon Rawlinson, Mario Roccuzzo, Shakeel Shahdad","doi":"10.1111/clr.70006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>The effect of osteotomy overpreparation, and thus lack of primary stability, on implant osseointegration and crestal bone volume maintenance was investigated by comparing placement of dental implants with either a standard osteotomy preparation (NP) or an overprepared osteotomy (OP) where the final osteotomy drill was larger in diameter than the implant placed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Bone-level implants (Ø3.3 mm diameter) were placed in the mandible of minipigs with two preparation techniques: an NP (Group 1) and an OP to a final osteotomy of 3.5 mm in diameter (Group 2) and submerged for 2 and 8 weeks. An Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) was measured for each implant at placement. Implant survival, defined histologically as the absence of fibrous encapsulation and the presence of direct bone-to-implant contact, osseointegration and crestal bone formation were analysed histologically and histomorphometrically to compare the preparation techniques.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A 100% survival for both preparation types was observed. The mean ISQ at insertion for Groups 1 and 2 was 69.35 a.u. (95% CI: 68.02–70.68) and 11.95 a.u. (95% CI: 10.53–13.37) respectively (<i>p</i> < 0.001). At 2 and 8 weeks, there was no difference between the two groups for total bone-to-implant contact (tBIC) (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Group 2 demonstrated significantly higher mean first bone-to-implant contact (fBIC), coronal bone-to-implant contact (cBIC) and bone-area-to-total-area (BATA) at 2 and 8 weeks compared to Group 1 (<i>p</i> < 0.05).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Implants inserted into an overprepared osteotomy with no primary stability successfully osseointegrated. At 2 and 8 weeks, OP resulted in significantly more coronal bone apposition and maintenance of coronal bone volume as measured by fBIC, cBIC and BATA.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":"36 10","pages":"1346-1359"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/clr.70006","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/clr.70006","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

The effect of osteotomy overpreparation, and thus lack of primary stability, on implant osseointegration and crestal bone volume maintenance was investigated by comparing placement of dental implants with either a standard osteotomy preparation (NP) or an overprepared osteotomy (OP) where the final osteotomy drill was larger in diameter than the implant placed.

Methods

Bone-level implants (Ø3.3 mm diameter) were placed in the mandible of minipigs with two preparation techniques: an NP (Group 1) and an OP to a final osteotomy of 3.5 mm in diameter (Group 2) and submerged for 2 and 8 weeks. An Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) was measured for each implant at placement. Implant survival, defined histologically as the absence of fibrous encapsulation and the presence of direct bone-to-implant contact, osseointegration and crestal bone formation were analysed histologically and histomorphometrically to compare the preparation techniques.

Results

A 100% survival for both preparation types was observed. The mean ISQ at insertion for Groups 1 and 2 was 69.35 a.u. (95% CI: 68.02–70.68) and 11.95 a.u. (95% CI: 10.53–13.37) respectively (p < 0.001). At 2 and 8 weeks, there was no difference between the two groups for total bone-to-implant contact (tBIC) (p > 0.05). Group 2 demonstrated significantly higher mean first bone-to-implant contact (fBIC), coronal bone-to-implant contact (cBIC) and bone-area-to-total-area (BATA) at 2 and 8 weeks compared to Group 1 (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Implants inserted into an overprepared osteotomy with no primary stability successfully osseointegrated. At 2 and 8 weeks, OP resulted in significantly more coronal bone apposition and maintenance of coronal bone volume as measured by fBIC, cBIC and BATA.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

缺乏初级稳定性的骨整合：实验性临床前下颌迷你猪体内过度制备模型。

目的通过比较标准截骨准备（NP）和过度截骨准备（OP）（最终截骨钻直径大于所放置的种植体）对种植体骨整合和嵴骨体积维持的影响，研究截骨过度准备（因此缺乏初级稳定性）对种植体骨整合和嵴骨体积维持的影响。方法采用NP（1组）和OP（2组）两种制备方法，将直径为Ø3.3 mm的骨水平种植体放置于小型猪下颌骨，最终截骨直径为3.5 mm（2组），浸泡2周和8周。在放置时测量每个种植体的种植体稳定商（ISQ）。种植体存活，在组织学上定义为纤维包被的缺失和骨与种植体直接接触的存在，骨整合和嵴骨形成在组织学和组织形态学上进行了分析，以比较制备技术。结果两种制剂的存活率均为100%。第1组和第2组的平均ISQ为69.35 a.u。（95% CI: 68.02-70.68）和11.95 a.u。（95% CI: 10.53 ~ 13.37），差异有统计学意义（p 0.05）。2组在第2周和第8周的平均首次骨与种植体接触（fBIC）、冠状骨与种植体接触（cBIC）和骨面积与总面积（BATA）均显著高于1组（p < 0.05）。结论种植体置入预备过度的截骨术中，在无初始稳定性的情况下成功实现骨整合。在第2周和第8周，通过fBIC、cBIC和BATA测量，OP显著增加了冠状骨的附着和冠状骨体积的维持。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Clinical Oral Implants Research 医学-工程：生物医学

CiteScore

7.70

自引率

11.60%

发文量

149

审稿时长

3 months

期刊介绍： Clinical Oral Implants Research conveys scientific progress in the field of implant dentistry and its related areas to clinicians, teachers and researchers concerned with the application of this information for the benefit of patients in need of oral implants. The journal addresses itself to clinicians, general practitioners, periodontists, oral and maxillofacial surgeons and prosthodontists, as well as to teachers, academicians and scholars involved in the education of professionals and in the scientific promotion of the field of implant dentistry.