Discussion : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [2]
In the present study, the implants were positioned in the crestal bone level, by following Bornstein et al. [34, 35] which reported that the implants are often inserted within the bone crest. Tomasi et al. [36] in a clinical trial observed that the implant position conditioned the amount of buccal crest resorption. Moreover, the thickness of the buccal bone plate and the tridimensional positioning of the implant must be considered because these are important factors that influence the response of hard tissues during healing. In this sense, each animal was performed a surgical guide, based in the previous natural teeth, to position the implants in all groups and conditions in the same place because mainly in the site with the presence of alveolus post-extraction, this condition induces the error of the ideal position during the implant osteotomy.
In relation to the non-submerged implants, it has become a widely reported practice with success rates ranging from 82.9 to 95.7% [37,38,39]. Theoretically, submerged implant during the osseointegration period are less susceptible to complications; however, some studies comparing submerged implants and non-submerged showed no difference in the implant failure rate, postoperative infection, and marginal bone loss [40]. In the present study, the two groups with non-submerged implants compared between them (groups 1 vs 2 and, groups 3 vs 4), the bone height was smaller, which is likely related to the presence of micromovements generated during mastication during the initial period of osseointegration [41].
Today, implants with expanded platform have demonstrated better crestal bone preservation. Then, in this study, it was carried out by the insertion of implants with an expanded platform and a surface characterized for presenting light roughness in the upper part of the neck, different parts of the body, and apical portion where showed a highly roughness. Previous studies had established that the use of implants with a rough surface may influence the amount of bone regeneration and the values of BIC during healing [9, 20, 42]. Different studies have assessed that implants presenting a rough surface may influence the degree of bone regeneration and the percentages of BIC during healing [9, 43, 44]. Calvo-Guirado et al. [31, 45] concluded that the surface treatment can reduce the crestal bone resorption. Cooper [46] found that an increased surface roughness improves bone integration of the implant, increases osteoconduction, and increases osteogenesis.
Serial posts:
- Abstract : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Background : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [1]
- Background : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [2]
- Methods : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [1]
- Methods : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [2]
- Methods : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [3]
- Results : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Discussion : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [1]
- Discussion : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [2]
- Discussion : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [3]
- Conclusions : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- References : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [1]
- References : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [2]
- References : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [3]
- References : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [4]
- References : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [5]
- Author information : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Ethics declarations : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Rights and permissions : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- About this article : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Table 1 Mean, median, standard deviation, and standard error for each group evaluated for lingual as well as buccal sites of the crestal bone height (in mm) for all groups : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Table 2 Mean, median, standard deviation, and standard error for each group evaluated for lingual as well as buccal sites of the tissue thickness (in mm) for all groups : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Table 3 Statistical analysis comparing measured distances (A-B and C-D) among different groups in buccal and lingual sites : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Fig. 1. Image of the implant (a) and surface (b) used in the present study : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant
- Fig. 2. Parameters measured in each group. Crestal bone loss is the distance between the implant collar (A) and the first bone contact of the crestal bone (B) = A-B bone height; and, the tissue thickness that is the distance from the implant collar (C) to the more external portion of the tissues (D) = C-D tissue thickness. Picrosirius red staining. Original magnification × 16 : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant
- Fig. 3. Images of groups 1 and 2 representing the implants place in fresh sockets sites. Picrosirius red staining. Original magnification × 4 : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant
- Fig. 4. Images of groups 3 and 4 representing the implants place in healed alveolar sites. Picrosirius red staining. Original magnification × 4 : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant
- Fig. 5. Graph comparing the data of buccal (B) and lingual (L) measured the A-B distance (bone height). Group 1 = implant installed in fresh extraction and submerged; group 2 = implants in fresh extraction and immediately exposed; group 3 = implants installed in healed site and submerged; and group 4 = implants in healed site and immediately exposed : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant
- Fig. 6. Graph comparing the data of buccal (B) and lingual (L) measured the C-D distance (tissue thickness). Group 1 = implant installed in fresh extraction and submerged; group 2 = implants in fresh extraction and immediately exposed; group 3 = implants installed in healed site and submerged; and group 4 = implants in healed site and immediately exposed : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant
- Fig. 7. Multiple graphs comparing A-B distance (height bone) (a) and the C-D distance (tissue thickness) (b) among different groups. Differences between groups were assessed by Dunn’s multiple comparison test (*P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001). 1 = (group 1) implant installed in fresh extraction and submerged; 2 = (group 2) implants in fresh extraction and immediately exposed; 3 = (group 3) implants installed in healed site and submerged; and 4 = (group 4) implants in healed site and immediately exposed : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant