Open hour: senin - sabtu 09:00:00 - 20:00:00; minggu & tanggal merah tutup

Fig. 6. Optic microscope photo (× 9 magnification...

Fig. 6. Optic microscope photo (× 9 magnification) after 30 days of implantation. Left side: machined implant (group C). Central photo: sandblasted and acid-etched implant (group A). Right side: laser-treated implant Fig. 6. Optic microscope photo (× 9 magnification) after 30 days of implantation. Left side: machined implant (group C). Central photo: sandblasted and acid-etched implant ...

Fig. 5. Optic microscope photo (× 9 magnification...

Fig. 5. Optic microscope photo (× 9 magnification) after 15 days of implantation. Left side: machined implant (group C). Central photo: sandblasted and acid-etched implant (group A). Right side: laser-treated implant Fig. 5. Optic microscope photo (× 9 magnification) after 15 days of implantation. Left side: machined implant (group C). Central photo: sandblasted and acid-etched implant ...

Fig. 4. Exemplificative photo of implant placement...

Fig. 4. Exemplificative photo of implant placement in sheep iliac crest (left side). All implant groups were inserted in the same bone host Fig. 4. Exemplificative photo of implant placement in sheep iliac crest (left side). All implant groups were inserted in the same bone host

Fig. 3. Scanning electron microscopy picture of gr...

Fig. 3. Scanning electron microscopy picture of group C implant surface Fig. 3. Scanning electron microscopy picture of group C implant surface

Fig. 2. Scanning electron microscopy picture of gr...

Fig. 2. Scanning electron microscopy picture of group B implant surface Fig. 2. Scanning electron microscopy picture of group B implant surface

Fig. 1. Scanning electron microscopy picture of gr...

Fig. 1. Scanning electron microscopy picture of group A implant surface Fig. 1. Scanning electron microscopy picture of group A implant surface

Table 3 Mean BIC% value of each group after 30 d...

Group BIC% (mean ± SD) A 50.31 ± 13.44 B 56.53 ± 13.62 C 20.54 ± 11.06   Table 3 Mean BIC% value of each group after 30 days of healing

Table 2 Mean BIC% value of each group after 15 d...

Group BIC% (mean ± SD) A 39.08 ± 15.85 B 37.35 ± 15.76 C 25.28 ± 8.97   Table 2 Mean BIC% value of each group after 15 days of healing

Table 1 Implants details of both groups: screw pit...

 Group A implantsGroup B implantsGroup C implantsScrew pitch1.25 mm0.6 mm0.6 mmSmooth neck2.8 mm0.25 mm0.25 mmSurface treatmentLarge grit-blasted and acid-etched SLA surface, processed to a high degree of hydrophilicity (SLActive®)Laser surface characterized by a series of 20 μm diameter holes (7–10 μm deep) every 10 μm (Syntegra®)Machined surfaceSurface roughness (Ra)1.5...

About this article : Comparative evaluation among ...

De Tullio, I., Berardini, M., Di Iorio, D. et al. Comparative evaluation among laser-treated, machined, and sandblasted/acid-etched implant surfaces: an in vivo histologic analysis on sheep. Int J Implant Dent 6, 7 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0204-4 Download citation Received: 30 August 2019 Accepted: 24 December 2019 Published: 19 February 2020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40...

Rights and permissions : Comparative evaluation am...

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were m...

Additional information : Comparative evaluation am...

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Ethics declarations : Comparative evaluation among...

The Ethics Committee for Animal Research of the Veterinary School of the University of Teramo (Teramo, Italy) approved the study protocol, according to the guidelines established by the European Union Council Directive of February 2013 (R.D.53/2013) (protocol number 3809). The Ethics Committee for Animal Research of the Veterinary School of the University of Teramo (Teramo, Italy) approved the st...

Author information : Comparative evaluation among ...

Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy I. De Tullio, F. Perfetti & G. Perfetti Pescara, Italy M. Berardini Foggia, Italy D. Di Iorio You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar You c...

Funding : Comparative evaluation among laser-treat...

No grants were received for the present study.

Acknowledgements : Comparative evaluation among la...

The authors wish to thank the company Geass s.r.l. for providing implants used in the present study.

References : Comparative evaluation among laser-tr...

Piattelli A, Manzon L, Scarano A, Paolantonio M, Piattelli M. Histologic and histomorphometric analysis of the bone response to machined and sandblasted titanium implants: an experimental study in rabbits. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1998;13:805–10. Lee JT, Cho SA. Biomechanical evaluation of laser-etched Ti implant surfaces vs. chemically modified SLA Ti implant surfaces: Removal torque an...

References : Comparative evaluation among laser-tr...

Gaggl A, Schultes G, Muller WD, Karcher H. Scanning electron microscopical analysis of laser-treated titanium implant surfaces. A comparative study. Biomaterials. 2000;21(10):1067–73. Bonsignore LA, Colbrunn RW, Tatro JM, Messerschmitt PJ, Hernandez CJ, Goldberg VM, Stewart MC, Greenfield EM. Surface contaminants inhibit osseointegration in a novel murine model. Bone. 2011;49(5):923–30. Peng...

References : Comparative evaluation among laser-tr...

Albrektsson T, Brånemark PI, Hansson HA, Lindström J. Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. Acta Orthop Scand. 1981;52(2):155–70. Puleo DA, Nanci A. Understanding and controlling the bone-implant interface. Biomaterials. 1999;20(23-24):2311–21. Huang MS, Chen LK, Ou KL, et al. Rapid osseointegration of titanium...

Availability of data and materials : Comparative e...

All data and materials are available at University Chieti-Pescara, Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy.

Conclusions : Comparative evaluation among laser-t...

Results from the present in vivo analysis revealed that both sandblasted and acid-etched titanium implants and laser-treated titanium implants, compared to the machined ones, have higher values of osseointegration in less healing time. Indeed, both groups A and B at 15 days had higher values of the BIC% if compared to group C and were able to significantly increase their BIC% in the passage fro...

Discussion : Comparative evaluation among laser-tr...

Data showed by the present study suggest that laser and sandblasted and acid-etched surface treatments could enhance the osteogenic bone formation by “contact,” already observed by other authors [20, 21]. Another interesting emerging datum is the observation of BIC% changes between 15 and 30 days: it is possible to assume that between the fifteenth and the thirtieth day, most part of the pe...

Discussion : Comparative evaluation among laser-tr...

In the present study, the iliac crest of the sheep was chosen as a model because the site is characterized by a cancellous bone rich in marrow spaces, similar for quality to D4 density. This bone model appears superimposable to postero-lateral sectors of the human upper jaw that often represents a hard challenge for implant osseointegration due to low bone density. Bone quality, in fact, is a key...

Results : Comparative evaluation among laser-treat...

All implants resulted clinically integrated and stable into the bone tissue. No signs of tissue inflammation or infection were detected. At low magnification, all the samples appeared surrounded by new tissue. The distinction between native tissue and newly formed bone was not clear, likely due to the fact that the latter is still in an initial forming phase. In the machined samples (group C) bon...

Materials and methods : Comparative evaluation amo...

Measurement of the total length of the left half of the fixture; Measurement of the contact area between bone and implant in the left half of the fixture; Measurement of the total length of the right half of the fixture; and Measurement of the contact area between bone and implant in the right half of the fixture. Afterwards, the sum of parameters A and C represented the total length of the wh...

Materials and methods : Comparative evaluation amo...

Implant drilling procedures were carried out using the drill sequence recommended by the manufacturer. The drill speed was set at 700 rpm under continuous sterile saline solution irrigation (stored at + 4 °C). Implants were inserted with an insertion torque peak between 28 and 34 Ncm. Each animal received three implants of each group. The suture of deep muscle planes was performed with poly...

Materials and methods : Comparative evaluation amo...

The Ethics Committee for Animal Research of the Veterinary School of the University of Teramo (Teramo, Italy) approved the study protocol, which followed guidelines established by the European Union Council Directive of February 2013 (R.D.53/2013). A total of 36 implants were used in the present study. Implants had different macro-geometries and surfaces and they were divided into three groups of...

Introduction : Comparative evaluation among laser-...

In addition, some animal studies [15, 16] found an increased removal torque in laser processed implants compared to machined surface implants inserted. The aim of the present paper was to evaluate the osseointegration process, in terms of bone to implant contact percentage (BIC%), of three different implants surface (machined, sandblasted and acid-etched, and laser-treated) both after 15 and 30...

Introduction : Comparative evaluation among laser-...

Dental implant surfaces represent one of the key factors that could influence the osseointegration processes [1]. Puleo et al. [2] confirmed that the surface topography, as well as the chemical nature and the implant macro and micro geometry, is involved in creating a clinical and histological efficient bone-implant interface. It was demonstrated that different superficial treatments could affect ...

Abstract : Comparative evaluation among laser-trea...

The aim of the present in vivo analysis was to evaluate the osseointegration process of titanium implants with three different surfaces (machined, sandblasted and acid-etched, and laser-treated) after 15 and 30 days of healing period. Thirty-six implants with different surfaces were placed in the iliac crest of four Bergamasca sheep. The implant surfaces tested were sandblasted and acid-etched ...

Fig. 6. Optic microscope photo (× 9 magnification...

Fig. 6. Optic microscope photo (× 9 magnification) after 30 days of implantation. Left side: machined implant (group C). Central photo: sandblasted and acid-etched implant (group A). Right side: laser-treated implant Fig. 6. Optic microscope photo (× 9 magnification) after 30 days of implantation. Left side: machined implant (group C). Central photo: sandblasted and acid-etched implant ...

Fig. 5. Optic microscope photo (× 9 magnification...

Fig. 5. Optic microscope photo (× 9 magnification) after 15 days of implantation. Left side: machined implant (group C). Central photo: sandblasted and acid-etched implant (group A). Right side: laser-treated implant Fig. 5. Optic microscope photo (× 9 magnification) after 15 days of implantation. Left side: machined implant (group C). Central photo: sandblasted and acid-etched implant ...

Fig. 4. Exemplificative photo of implant placement...

Fig. 4. Exemplificative photo of implant placement in sheep iliac crest (left side). All implant groups were inserted in the same bone host Fig. 4. Exemplificative photo of implant placement in sheep iliac crest (left side). All implant groups were inserted in the same bone host

Fig. 3. Scanning electron microscopy picture of gr...

Fig. 3. Scanning electron microscopy picture of group C implant surface Fig. 3. Scanning electron microscopy picture of group C implant surface

Fig. 2. Scanning electron microscopy picture of gr...

Fig. 2. Scanning electron microscopy picture of group B implant surface Fig. 2. Scanning electron microscopy picture of group B implant surface

Fig. 1. Scanning electron microscopy picture of gr...

Fig. 1. Scanning electron microscopy picture of group A implant surface Fig. 1. Scanning electron microscopy picture of group A implant surface

Table 3 Mean BIC% value of each group after 30 d...

GroupBIC% (mean ± SD)A50.31 ± 13.44B56.53 ± 13.62C20.54 ± 11.06Table 3 Mean BIC% value of each group after 30 days of healing

Table 2 Mean BIC% value of each group after 15 d...

Group BIC% (mean ± SD) A 39.08 ± 15.85 B 37.35 ± 15.76 C 25.28 ± 8.97   Table 2 Mean BIC% value of each group after 15 days of healing

Table 1 Implants details of both groups: screw pit...

 Group A implantsGroup B implantsGroup C implantsScrew pitch1.25 mm0.6 mm0.6 mmSmooth neck2.8 mm0.25 mm0.25 mmSurface treatmentLarge grit-blasted and acid-etched SLA surface, processed to a high degree of hydrophilicity (SLActive®)Laser surface characterized by a series of 20 μm diameter holes (7–10 μm deep) every 10 μm (Syntegra®)Machined surfaceSurface roughness (Ra)1.5...

About this article : Comparative evaluation among ...

De Tullio, I., Berardini, M., Di Iorio, D. et al. Comparative evaluation among laser-treated, machined, and sandblasted/acid-etched implant surfaces: an in vivo histologic analysis on sheep. Int J Implant Dent 6, 7 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0204-4 Download citation Received: 30 August 2019 Accepted: 24 December 2019 Published: 19 February 2020 DOI: https:...

Rights and permissions : Comparative evaluation am...

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were m...

Additional information : Comparative evaluation am...

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Ethics declarations : Comparative evaluation among...

The Ethics Committee for Animal Research of the Veterinary School of the University of Teramo (Teramo, Italy) approved the study protocol, according to the guidelines established by the European Union Council Directive of February 2013 (R.D.53/2013) (protocol number 3809). The Ethics Committee for Animal Research of the Veterinary School of the University of Teramo (Teramo, Italy) approved the st...

Author information : Comparative evaluation among ...

Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy I. De Tullio, F. Perfetti & G. Perfetti Pescara, Italy M. Berardini Foggia, Italy D. Di Iorio You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar You c...

Funding : Comparative evaluation among laser-treat...

No grants were received for the present study.

Acknowledgements : Comparative evaluation among la...

The authors wish to thank the company Geass s.r.l. for providing implants used in the present study.

References : Comparative evaluation among laser-tr...

Piattelli A, Manzon L, Scarano A, Paolantonio M, Piattelli M. Histologic and histomorphometric analysis of the bone response to machined and sandblasted titanium implants: an experimental study in rabbits. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1998;13:805–10. Lee JT, Cho SA. Biomechanical evaluation of laser-etched Ti implant surfaces vs. chemically modified SLA Ti implant surfaces: Removal torque an...

References : Comparative evaluation among laser-tr...

Gaggl A, Schultes G, Muller WD, Karcher H. Scanning electron microscopical analysis of laser-treated titanium implant surfaces. A comparative study. Biomaterials. 2000;21(10):1067–73. Bonsignore LA, Colbrunn RW, Tatro JM, Messerschmitt PJ, Hernandez CJ, Goldberg VM, Stewart MC, Greenfield EM. Surface contaminants inhibit osseointegration in a novel murine model. Bone. 2011;49(5):923–30. Peng...

References : Comparative evaluation among laser-tr...

Albrektsson T, Brånemark PI, Hansson HA, Lindström J. Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. Acta Orthop Scand. 1981;52(2):155–70. Puleo DA, Nanci A. Understanding and controlling the bone-implant interface. Biomaterials. 1999;20(23-24):2311–21. Huang MS, Chen LK, Ou KL, et al. Rapid osseointegration of titanium...

Availability of data and materials : Comparative e...

All data and materials are available at University Chieti-Pescara, Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy.

Conclusions : Comparative evaluation among laser-t...

Results from the present in vivo analysis revealed that both sandblasted and acid-etched titanium implants and laser-treated titanium implants, compared to the machined ones, have higher values of osseointegration in less healing time. Indeed, both groups A and B at 15 days had higher values of the BIC% if compared to group C and were able to significantly increase their BIC% in the passage fro...

Discussion : Comparative evaluation among laser-tr...

Data showed by the present study suggest that laser and sandblasted and acid-etched surface treatments could enhance the osteogenic bone formation by “contact,” already observed by other authors [20, 21]. Another interesting emerging datum is the observation of BIC% changes between 15 and 30 days: it is possible to assume that between the fifteenth and the thirtieth day, most part of the pe...

Discussion : Comparative evaluation among laser-tr...

In the present study, the iliac crest of the sheep was chosen as a model because the site is characterized by a cancellous bone rich in marrow spaces, similar for quality to D4 density. This bone model appears superimposable to postero-lateral sectors of the human upper jaw that often represents a hard challenge for implant osseointegration due to low bone density. Bone quality, in fact, is a key...

Results : Comparative evaluation among laser-treat...

All implants resulted clinically integrated and stable into the bone tissue. No signs of tissue inflammation or infection were detected. At low magnification, all the samples appeared surrounded by new tissue. The distinction between native tissue and newly formed bone was not clear, likely due to the fact that the latter is still in an initial forming phase. In the machined samples (group C) bon...

Materials and methods : Comparative evaluation amo...

Measurement of the total length of the left half of the fixture; Measurement of the contact area between bone and implant in the left half of the fixture; Measurement of the total length of the right half of the fixture; and Measurement of the contact area between bone and implant in the right half of the fixture. Afterwards, the sum of parameters A and C represented the total length of the wh...

Materials and methods : Comparative evaluation amo...

Implant drilling procedures were carried out using the drill sequence recommended by the manufacturer. The drill speed was set at 700 rpm under continuous sterile saline solution irrigation (stored at + 4 °C). Implants were inserted with an insertion torque peak between 28 and 34 Ncm. Each animal received three implants of each group. The suture of deep muscle planes was performed with poly...

Materials and methods : Comparative evaluation amo...

The Ethics Committee for Animal Research of the Veterinary School of the University of Teramo (Teramo, Italy) approved the study protocol, which followed guidelines established by the European Union Council Directive of February 2013 (R.D.53/2013). A total of 36 implants were used in the present study. Implants had different macro-geometries and surfaces and they were divided into three groups of...

Introduction : Comparative evaluation among laser-...

In addition, some animal studies [15, 16] found an increased removal torque in laser processed implants compared to machined surface implants inserted. The aim of the present paper was to evaluate the osseointegration process, in terms of bone to implant contact percentage (BIC%), of three different implants surface (machined, sandblasted and acid-etched, and laser-treated) both after 15 and 30...

Introduction : Comparative evaluation among laser-...

Dental implant surfaces represent one of the key factors that could influence the osseointegration processes [1]. Puleo et al. [2] confirmed that the surface topography, as well as the chemical nature and the implant macro and micro geometry, is involved in creating a clinical and histological efficient bone-implant interface. It was demonstrated that different superficial treatments could affect ...

Abstract : Comparative evaluation among laser-trea...

The aim of the present in vivo analysis was to evaluate the osseointegration process of titanium implants with three different surfaces (machined, sandblasted and acid-etched, and laser-treated) after 15 and 30 days of healing period. Thirty-six implants with different surfaces were placed in the iliac crest of four Bergamasca sheep. The implant surfaces tested were sandblasted and acid-etched ...