Search

Background: Implant surface topography is a key element in achieving osseointegration. Nanostructured surfaces have shown promising results in accelerating and improving bone healing around dental implants. The main objective of the present clinical and histological study is to compare, at 4 and 6 weeks, (w) bone-to-implant contact in implants having either machined surface (MAC), sandblasted, large grit, acid-etched implant surface (SLA) medium roughness surface or a nanostructured calcium-incorporated surface (XPEED®). Methods: 35 mini-implants of 3.5 × 8.5 mm with three different surface treatments (XPEED® (n = 16)—SLA (n = 13)—MAC (n = 6), were placed in the posterior maxilla of 11 patients (6 females and 5 males) then, retrieved at either 4 or 6w in a randomized split-mouth study design. Results: The BIC rates measured at 4w and 6w respectively, were: 16.8% (±5.0) and 29.0% (±3.1) for MAC surface; 18.5% (±2.3) and 33.7% (±3.3) for SLA surface; 22.4% (±1.3) and 38.6% (±3.2) for XPEED® surface. In all types of investigated surfaces, the time factor appeared to significantly increase the bone to implant contact (BIC) rate (p < 0.05). XPEED® surface showed significantly higher BIC values when compared to both SLA and MAC values at 4w (p < 0.05). Also, at 6w, both roughened surfaces (SLA and XPEED®) showed significantly higher values (p < 0.05) than turned surface (MAC). Conclusions: Nanostructured Calcium titanate coating is able to enhance bone deposition around implants at early healing stages.

Guided implant surgery can enhance implant placement positioning, increasing predictability and decreasing postoperative complications., To date, the best protocol to be used for template realization is still unknown. Thus, the aim herein was to clinically compare the accuracy of two different protocols. A total of 48 implants were divided into Group A (24 implants), in which a stereolithographic template was realized using the digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) data arrived from cone beam computer tomographies (CBCTs) (patients and prothesis alone), and Group B (24 implant), in which a standard intraoral stent with a standardized extraoral support was used for patients’ intraoral impressions and CBCT. The preimplant virtual planning and postsurgery CBCT images of both groups were superimposed, and differences were registered in terms of average deviations at the platform (a) and implant apex (b), mean depth change (c), and angular deviation (d). The results demonstrated that there were no statistically significant differences between groups (p = 0.76) for the parameters measured. However, statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) were found between maxillary and mandible implant surgery, as the latter showed greater accuracy. Additional studies are necessary to further reduce discrepancies between planning and surgical procedures.

Periapical implantitis (IPL) is an increasingly frequent complication of dental implants. The causes of this condition are not yet entirely clear, although a bacterial component is certainly part of the etiology. In this case series study, two approaches will be described: because of persistent IPL symptoms, a patient had the implant removed and underwent histological analysis after week 6 from implantation. The histomorphometric examination revealed a 35% bone-implant contact area involving the coronal two-thirds of the implant. The apical portion of the fixture on the other hand was affected by an inflammatory process detectable on radiography as a radiolucent area. The presence of a probable root fragment, detectable as an imprecise radiopaque mass in the zone where the implant was later placed, confirms the probable bacterial etiology of this case of IPL. On the other hand, in case number 2, the presence of IPL around the fixture was solved by surgically removing the implant apical third as well as the adjacent tooth apex. It may be concluded from our histological examination that removal of the apical portion of the fixture should be considered an effective treatment for IPL since the remaining implant segment remains optimally osseointegrated and capable of continuing its function as a prosthetic abutment. Careful attention, however, is required at the implantation planning stage to identify in advance any sources of infection in the edentulous area of interest which might compromise the final outcome.

Microbial contamination could compromise the stability of dental implants increasing the risk of inflammatory reactions in the surrounding soft tissues. In this human, randomized, double-blind, clinical study, the presence of Porphyromonas gingivalis on the healing abutment and the inflammatory infiltrate surrounding peri-implant soft tissues were investigated. Experiments were done in order to clarify the effect of 0.20% chlorhexidine (CHX) versus placebo, applied during each rehabilitation stage. Thirty patients (15 per group) were included. The load of adhering P. gingivalis on the healing screw were quantified by quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR) Taq-Man. Immunohistochemical analysis was carried out on the gingival biopsy. Moreover, clinical data were recorded. Analysis of variance and the Holm-Sidak test was used to evaluate differences between groups. The results showed a significant low presence of P. gingivalis load in healing abutments belonging to the 0.20% CHX group. Overall, the differences in terms of P. gingivalis DNA copy number between two groups were statistically significant ( p < 0.01). All implants showed very low plaque and bleeding scores, but the placebo group appeared to have the highest expression of inflammation markers for T Lymphocytes, B Lymphocytes and macrophages Cluster definitions (CD3, CD20 and CD68). The use of 0.20% CHX could be recommended in all clinical procedures as it reduces significantly P. gingivalis load and host inflammatory response around implants.