These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Histomorphometric comparison of implant anchorage for two types of dental implants after 3 and 6 months' healing in baboon jaws.
    Author: Carr AB, Larsen PE, Gerard DA.
    Journal: J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Mar; 85(3):276-80. PubMed ID: 11264935.
    Abstract:
    STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: A complete understanding of dental implant prognosis requires better knowledge of the bone anatomy after implant healing. Such baseline data are necessary to compare against load-induced changes in anatomy. PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to describe and compare measures of implant support (percentage [%] integration and percentage [%] bone area) for various implants in baboon jaws after healing times of 3 and 6 months. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Commercially pure titanium (cpTi) and titanium alloy (Ti-alloy) screw-shaped implants were placed in the posterior jaws of 9 female baboons after 2 months of postextraction healing. Specimens were harvested after 3 months (5 baboons: 8 cpTi, 7 Ti-alloy) and after 6 months (4 baboons: 8 cpTi, 8 Ti-alloy). Each implant provided 6 polished horizontal sections for data collection, which was accomplished from digitized images with the IMAGE analysis system (reliability at 1.6%). Three- and six-month data for each parameter were compared with the use of ANOVA (P<.01). RESULTS: The results revealed a significant increase in the % integration (cpTi 39.1 to 56.2; Ti-alloy 40.0 to 55.2) and the % bone area (cpTi 38.8 to 47.9; Ti-alloy 38.9 to 49.2) from 3 to 6 months for both implants. This significant increase was also true for comparisons by jaw for each implant material (P<.01 for overall and by jaw comparisons). CONCLUSION: A time-dependent increase in jawbone anchorage was measured in this nonhuman primate population, and it was shown that the 6-month maxillary data were comparable to the 3-month mandibular data. These results lend support to the clinical strategy of waiting longer to load implants in the maxilla.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]