Results : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study
No implant failure was observed after 2 months of healing. The clinical examination, done immediately after the bone block retrieval, showed no crestal bone resorption. No bone defects around implants, such as fenestration or dehiscence, were detected. The host bone density expressed in bone volume percentage (basal %BV) was 26.17 ± 2.35. This low value of BV% is common in soft bone, according to the NHS bone classification [23].
Implants that belonged to the test group showed a bone to implant contact percentage (%BIC) of 70.91 ± 7.95 while the control group implants had a %BIC value of 49.33 ± 10.73. The %BV was 41.83 ± 6.30 in the test group and 29.61 ± 5.05 in the control group (Figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6). These histomorphometric parameters were statistically different between the two groups. The statistical comparison between the host bone density (basal %BV) and %BV in the test group revealed that expander® implants were able to increase in a significant way the host bone density (Tables 1, 2 and 3).
The biomechanical analysis of secondary implant stability revealed a VAM value of 82.6 ± 23.27 in the test group and 60.5 ± 16.58 in the control group. The reverse torque (RT) was 98.2 ± 16.81 in the test group and 98.8 ± 24.40 in the control one. Histomorphometric and biomechanical data of both groups are summarized in Table 2.
Expander implant surface (test group) was covered by a thick layer of newly formed bone induced by the osteoconduction properties of the implant surface. A considerable amount of fractured trabeculae that led to bone chip condensation was present around implant threads. The osseocorticalization phenomenon characterized by more bone volume percentage around the implant area than in the neighboring areas, caused by implant threads geometry, was evident at low magnification. A reparative bone formation process that connected the fractured bone trabeculae to bone fragments and/or to the implant surface was evident, with remodeling phenomena characterized by osteoclastic resorption coupled with osteoid formation.
Serial posts:
- Abstract : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study
- Introduction : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study [1]
- Introduction : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study [2]
- Materials and methods : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study [1]
- Materials and methods : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study [2]
- Materials and methods : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study [3]
- Results : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study
- Discussion : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study [1]
- Discussion : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study [2]
- Conclusions : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study
- Availability of data and materials : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study
- References : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study [1]
- References : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study [2]
- References : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study [3]
- Acknowledgements : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study
- Funding : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study
- Author information : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study
- Ethics declarations : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study
- Additional information : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study
- Rights and permissions : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study
- About this article : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization during submerged healing: an in vivo pilot study
- Table 1 Basal bone volume percentage (basal %BV) was compared to %BV around implants after 2 months of healing in both groups. %BV in the test group was significantly higher than basal %BV (P < 0.05)
- Table 2 Mean values of histomorphometric parameters (%BIC and %BV) and biomechanical values (VAM, reverse torque, and ISQ) of each implant group : Single-drill implant induces bone corticalization
- Table 3 Statistical comparison (T test) of examined parameters between the test and control groups. The histomorphometric analysis demonstrated significant differences in BIC% and %BV values between
- Figure 1. Test group. The implant achieved a high osseointegration degree. The newly formed bone appeared well interconnected with the pre-existing trabeculae. The “corticalization” phenomenon is evident: the bone appears densified around a titanium implant (magnification × 8—toluidine blue) : Single-drill implant
- Figure 2. Test group. Implants in the test group showed an extremely high percentage of bone directly contacted to implant surface (magnification × 25—toluidine blue) : Single-drill implant
- Figure 3. Test group. The present histological photo showed a continuous thin layer of newly formed bone along the neck area of the implant (magnification × 25—toluidine blue) : Single-drill implant
- Figure 4. Control group. No bone condensation was possible with traditional burs and standard implant (magnification × 25—toluidine blue) : Single-drill implant
- Figure 5. Control group. Implants belonging to the control group showed some small surface areas not contacted with bone (magnification × 25—toluidine blue) : Single-drill implant
- Figure 6. Control group. Some implant thread areas were not covered by bone layer (magnification × 25—toluidine blue) : Single-drill implant