Osseointegration of dental implants in extraction sockets preserved with porous titanium granules – an experimental study. Issue 2 (27th November 2012)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Verket, Anders; Lyngstadaas, Ståle P.; Rønold, Hans J.; Wohlfahrt, Johan C.
• Is Part Of: Clinical oral implants research. Volume 25:Issue 2(2014:Feb.)
• Page Start: e100
• Page End: e108
• Publication Date: 2012-11-27
• Subjects: Dental implants -- Research -- Periodicals; 617.69
• DOI: 10.1111/clr.12070
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0905-7161

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main" id="clr12070-abs-0001"> <title>Abstract</title> <sec id="clr12070-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Objectives</title> <p>This study investigated osseointegration of dental implants inserted in healed extraction sockets preserved with porous titanium granules (PTG).</p> </sec> <sec id="clr12070-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Material and Methods</title> <p>Three adult female minipigs (Gøttingen minipig<sup>™</sup>; Ellegaard A/S, Dalmose, Denmark) had the mandibular teeth P2, P3 and P4 extracted. The extraction sockets were preserved with metallic PTG (Tigran<sup>™</sup> PTG; Tigran Technologies AB, Malmö, Sweden) <italic>n</italic> = 12, heat oxidized white porous titanium granules (WPTG) (Tigran<sup>™</sup> PTG White) <italic>n</italic> = 12 or left empty (sham) <italic>n</italic> = 6. All sites were covered with collagen membranes (Bio‐Gide<sup>®</sup>; Geistlich Pharma, Wolhausen, Switzerland) and allowed 11 weeks of healing before implants (Straumann<sup>®</sup> Bone Level; Straumann, Basel, Switzerland) were inserted. The temperature was measured during preparation of the osteotomies. Resonance frequency analysis (RFA, Osstell<sup>™</sup>; Osstell AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) was performed at implant insertion and at termination. After 6 weeks of submerged implant healing, the pigs were euthanized and jaw segments were excised for microCT and histological analyses.</p> </sec> <sec id="clr12070-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>In the temperature and RFA analyses no significant differences were recorded between the test groups. The microCT analysis demonstrated an average bone volume of 61.7% for the PTG group compared to 50.3% for the WPTG group (<italic>P</italic> = 0.03) and 57.1% for the sham group. Histomorphometry demonstrated an average bone‐to‐implant contact of 68.2% for the PTG group compared to 36.6% for the WPTG group and 60.9% for the sham group (n.s). Eight out of ten implants demonstrated apical osseous defects in the WPTG group, but similar defects were observed in all groups.</p> </sec> <sec id="clr12070-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusions</title> <p>PTG preserved extraction sockets demonstrate a similar outcome as the sham control group for all analyses suggesting that this material potentially can be used for extraction socket preservation prior to implant installment. Apical osseous defects were however observed in all groups including the sham group, and a single cause could not be determined.</p> </sec> </abstract>