Histomorphometric Analysis of Implant Anchorage for 3 Types of Dental Implants Following 6 Months of Healing in Baboon Jaws

Alan B. Carr, David Gerard, Peter E. Larsen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In an effort to better understand the supporting anatomy for unloaded endosseous dental implants, this study focused on the histomorphometric analysis of 3 different types of implants placed into non-human primate jaws and allowed to heal for 6 months. This report describes data from 24 screw-type dental implants placed in edentulated (2 months healing time) posterior arches of 4 adult female baboons. Three different implants were placed and allowed to heal for 6 months prior to processing for evaluation: commercially pure titanium (n = 8), titanium alloy (n = 8), and titanium plasma-sprayed (n = 8). Circumferential bone-implant interface sampling from 6 regions along the entire length of each implant was obtained for evaluation of percent bone-implant contact (%BIC) and percent bone area (%BA), within 3 mm of the implant. Data were collected (reliability of 1.6% for both parameters) and analyzed by an observer blinded to implant material using IMAGE analysis software for differences between jaws, implant biomaterials, and jaw/biomaterial (analysis of variance, pairwise comparison using least squares method with Bonferroni adjustment). The results indicated that the overall mean %BIC was 55.8 and mean %BA was 48.1. Maxillary and mandibular differences for both parameters were statistically significantly different: %BIC in maxilla 50.8, in mandible 60.8; %BA in maxilla 43.6, in mandible 52.6 (both significant at the P < .05 level). The biomaterial analyses revealed no significant differences between the different implants for %BIC or %BA. The trend observed-that mandibular values were greater than maxillary values for the overall jaw comparisons - was found to be consistent at the jaw/biomaterial level, although the small sample size limited statistical power. These data, along with data from a previous 3-month study, provide insight into baseline supporting anatomy for dental implants.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)785-791
Number of pages7
JournalInternational Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants
Volume15
Issue number6
StatePublished - Dec 1 2000

Fingerprint

imidazole mustard
Dental Implants
Papio
Jaw
Biocompatible Materials
Titanium
Maxilla
Mandible
Anatomy
Bone and Bones
Least-Squares Analysis
Sample Size
Primates
Analysis of Variance
Software

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Oral Surgery

Cite this

Histomorphometric Analysis of Implant Anchorage for 3 Types of Dental Implants Following 6 Months of Healing in Baboon Jaws. / Carr, Alan B.; Gerard, David; Larsen, Peter E.

In: International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, Vol. 15, No. 6, 01.12.2000, p. 785-791.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3d1f02868b66422b92d0107c6a2de1b1,
title = "Histomorphometric Analysis of Implant Anchorage for 3 Types of Dental Implants Following 6 Months of Healing in Baboon Jaws",
abstract = "In an effort to better understand the supporting anatomy for unloaded endosseous dental implants, this study focused on the histomorphometric analysis of 3 different types of implants placed into non-human primate jaws and allowed to heal for 6 months. This report describes data from 24 screw-type dental implants placed in edentulated (2 months healing time) posterior arches of 4 adult female baboons. Three different implants were placed and allowed to heal for 6 months prior to processing for evaluation: commercially pure titanium (n = 8), titanium alloy (n = 8), and titanium plasma-sprayed (n = 8). Circumferential bone-implant interface sampling from 6 regions along the entire length of each implant was obtained for evaluation of percent bone-implant contact ({\%}BIC) and percent bone area ({\%}BA), within 3 mm of the implant. Data were collected (reliability of 1.6{\%} for both parameters) and analyzed by an observer blinded to implant material using IMAGE analysis software for differences between jaws, implant biomaterials, and jaw/biomaterial (analysis of variance, pairwise comparison using least squares method with Bonferroni adjustment). The results indicated that the overall mean {\%}BIC was 55.8 and mean {\%}BA was 48.1. Maxillary and mandibular differences for both parameters were statistically significantly different: {\%}BIC in maxilla 50.8, in mandible 60.8; {\%}BA in maxilla 43.6, in mandible 52.6 (both significant at the P < .05 level). The biomaterial analyses revealed no significant differences between the different implants for {\%}BIC or {\%}BA. The trend observed-that mandibular values were greater than maxillary values for the overall jaw comparisons - was found to be consistent at the jaw/biomaterial level, although the small sample size limited statistical power. These data, along with data from a previous 3-month study, provide insight into baseline supporting anatomy for dental implants.",
author = "Carr, {Alan B.} and David Gerard and Larsen, {Peter E.}",
year = "2000",
month = "12",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "15",
pages = "785--791",
journal = "International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants",
issn = "0882-2786",
publisher = "Quintessence Publishing Company",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Histomorphometric Analysis of Implant Anchorage for 3 Types of Dental Implants Following 6 Months of Healing in Baboon Jaws

AU - Carr, Alan B.

AU - Gerard, David

AU - Larsen, Peter E.

PY - 2000/12/1

Y1 - 2000/12/1

N2 - In an effort to better understand the supporting anatomy for unloaded endosseous dental implants, this study focused on the histomorphometric analysis of 3 different types of implants placed into non-human primate jaws and allowed to heal for 6 months. This report describes data from 24 screw-type dental implants placed in edentulated (2 months healing time) posterior arches of 4 adult female baboons. Three different implants were placed and allowed to heal for 6 months prior to processing for evaluation: commercially pure titanium (n = 8), titanium alloy (n = 8), and titanium plasma-sprayed (n = 8). Circumferential bone-implant interface sampling from 6 regions along the entire length of each implant was obtained for evaluation of percent bone-implant contact (%BIC) and percent bone area (%BA), within 3 mm of the implant. Data were collected (reliability of 1.6% for both parameters) and analyzed by an observer blinded to implant material using IMAGE analysis software for differences between jaws, implant biomaterials, and jaw/biomaterial (analysis of variance, pairwise comparison using least squares method with Bonferroni adjustment). The results indicated that the overall mean %BIC was 55.8 and mean %BA was 48.1. Maxillary and mandibular differences for both parameters were statistically significantly different: %BIC in maxilla 50.8, in mandible 60.8; %BA in maxilla 43.6, in mandible 52.6 (both significant at the P < .05 level). The biomaterial analyses revealed no significant differences between the different implants for %BIC or %BA. The trend observed-that mandibular values were greater than maxillary values for the overall jaw comparisons - was found to be consistent at the jaw/biomaterial level, although the small sample size limited statistical power. These data, along with data from a previous 3-month study, provide insight into baseline supporting anatomy for dental implants.

AB - In an effort to better understand the supporting anatomy for unloaded endosseous dental implants, this study focused on the histomorphometric analysis of 3 different types of implants placed into non-human primate jaws and allowed to heal for 6 months. This report describes data from 24 screw-type dental implants placed in edentulated (2 months healing time) posterior arches of 4 adult female baboons. Three different implants were placed and allowed to heal for 6 months prior to processing for evaluation: commercially pure titanium (n = 8), titanium alloy (n = 8), and titanium plasma-sprayed (n = 8). Circumferential bone-implant interface sampling from 6 regions along the entire length of each implant was obtained for evaluation of percent bone-implant contact (%BIC) and percent bone area (%BA), within 3 mm of the implant. Data were collected (reliability of 1.6% for both parameters) and analyzed by an observer blinded to implant material using IMAGE analysis software for differences between jaws, implant biomaterials, and jaw/biomaterial (analysis of variance, pairwise comparison using least squares method with Bonferroni adjustment). The results indicated that the overall mean %BIC was 55.8 and mean %BA was 48.1. Maxillary and mandibular differences for both parameters were statistically significantly different: %BIC in maxilla 50.8, in mandible 60.8; %BA in maxilla 43.6, in mandible 52.6 (both significant at the P < .05 level). The biomaterial analyses revealed no significant differences between the different implants for %BIC or %BA. The trend observed-that mandibular values were greater than maxillary values for the overall jaw comparisons - was found to be consistent at the jaw/biomaterial level, although the small sample size limited statistical power. These data, along with data from a previous 3-month study, provide insight into baseline supporting anatomy for dental implants.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034327778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034327778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 15

SP - 785

EP - 791

JO - International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants

JF - International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants

SN - 0882-2786

IS - 6

ER -