RESUMO
Implantology has been an important component of dental management for over forty years, and during that period, many configurations of implant materials and methods have been developed. As empirical and clinical research yield new implant materials, there has been need to test and compare these materials to provide the most cost-effective and efficient implants. Evaluation of efficiency of implants has relied heavily on histological and radiological methods, but these one-dimensional measurement methods fail to evaluate the osteoblastic activity and osseointegration properties of putative implants. In this report, we describe the use of a quantitative single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) as a tool for comparing the osseointegrating capabilities of two types of implants.
La implantología ha sido un componente importante del tratamiento odontológico durante más de cuarenta años, y durante ese período, se han desarrollado muchas configuraciones de materiales y métodos de implante. A medida que la investigación empírica y clínica proporciona nuevos materiales de implante, ha surgido la necesidad de probar y comparar estos materiales para lograr que los implantes sean lo más costo-efectivos y eficientes posible. La evaluación de la eficiencia de los implantes ha dependido considerablemente de los métodos histológicos y radiológicos, pero estos métodos de medición unidimensional no son útiles a la hora de evaluar la actividad osteoblástica y las propiedades osteointegradoras de los implantes putativos. En este reporte, describimos el uso de la tomografía computarizada por emisión de fotones individuales (SPECT) como herramienta para comparar las capacidades osteointegradoras de dos tipos de implantes.
Assuntos
Animais , Feminino , Osteoblastos , Implantes Dentários , Osseointegração/fisiologia , Implantação Dentária Endóssea , Mandíbula/diagnóstico por imagem , Suínos , Regeneração Óssea/fisiologia , Tomografia Computadorizada de Emissão de Fóton Único , Modelos AnimaisRESUMO
Implantology has been an important component of dental management for over forty years, and during that period, many configurations of implant materials and methods have been developed. As empirical and clinical research yield new implant materials, there has been need to test and compare these materials to provide the most cost-effective and efficient implants. Evaluation of efficiency of implants has relied heavily on histological and radiological methods, but these one-dimensional measurement methods fail to evaluate the osteoblastic activity and osseointegration properties of putative implants. In this report, we describe the use of a quantitative single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) as a tool for comparing the osseointegrating capabilities of two types of implants.
Assuntos
Implantação Dentária Endóssea , Implantes Dentários , Mandíbula/diagnóstico por imagem , Osseointegração/fisiologia , Osteoblastos/diagnóstico por imagem , Animais , Regeneração Óssea/fisiologia , Feminino , Suínos , Tomografia Computadorizada de Emissão de Fóton ÚnicoRESUMO
The study was designed to exploit the single photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT) to compare osteoblastic activity of two implant systems: an Endopore implant (Beaded implants) placed immediately into an extraction socket in conjunction with peri-implant autogenous grafting supplemented with a guided tissue regeneration (GTR) technique, and an Endopore implant placed immediately into the extraction socket without peri-implant grafting and GTR. Endopore implants of the same size (12 mm x 4.1 mm INT-Hex) were placed in fresh extraction sockets in the canine-tooth region of the pigs jaw. The implant on the right side had peri-implant bone grafting utilizing autogenous bone together with cytoplast resorbable GTR membrane, whilst the implant on the left side received no peri-implant bone grafting. Osteoblastic activity was evaluated 81 days (11 weeks and 4 days) post implantation using the SPECT imaging technique. The SPECT imaging revealed more osteoblastic activity on the side with peri-implant bone grafting as compared with the site without peri-implant bone grafting. The result suggests that peri-implant bone grafting with GTR around the immediate implant showed more osteoblastic activity and thus enhanced osseointegration when compared with the implant without bone grafting and GTR. Bone grafting and GTR should be encouraged as a standard procedure with dental implants.