our online journals are moving. The new (and old) issues of all journals can be found at
In most cases you can log in there directly with your e-mail address and your current password. Otherwise we ask you to register again. Thank you very much.
Your Quintessence Publishing House
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 34 (2019), No. 1 21. Mar. 2019
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 34 (2019), No. 1 (21.03.2019)
Page 133-140a, doi:10.11607/jomi.6729, PubMed:30282092
The Implant Surface and Its Role in Affecting the Dynamic Processes of Bone Remodeling by Means of Distance Osteogenesis: A Comparative In Vivo Study
Thiem, Daniel G. E. / Adam, Martin / Ganz, Cornelia / Gerber, Thomas / Kämmerer, Peer W.
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate whether different surface modifications affect the dynamics of bone remodeling at the implant and the adjacent local bone.
Materials and Methods: Seventy-two dental implants with different surfaces (smooth and rough control [smCtrl; rCtrl], smooth and rough + O2-plasma spray [smPlas; rPlas], smooth and rough + nanocrystalline SiO2-hydroxyapatite coating [ncSiO2HA] + O2-plasma spray [smNB-C; rNB-C]; each n = 12) were bilaterally inserted into the femora of 36 New Zealand white rabbits. Intravital fluorochrome labeling was performed to visualize the dynamics of bone formation. The objectives were quantification of bone-to-implant contact (BIC [%]) at 2 and 4 weeks and the dynamic bone formation (dbf [%]) at the implants' adjacent local bone within 1, 2, and 3 weeks.
Results: After 2 weeks, BIC was significantly higher for both smNB-C (BIC: 59% ± 2% SEM) and rNB-C (BIC: 66% ± 3% SEM) compared with controls (BIC: 42% ± 1% SEM; P < .005). After 4 weeks, BIC for rNB-C (65% ± 2%) was superior to all test groups (BIC: 39% ± 2% SEM; P = .012). Regarding dbf (%), neither within 1 (P = .88), 2 (P = .48), nor after 3 weeks (P = .36) did any differences occur among the groups, even in accordance to the implant level.
Conclusion: Although distance osteogenesis seems crucial for the development of secondary stability, and thus, of osseointegration, it apparently is not affected by a bioactive ncSiO2HA surface coating. Changing the surfaces' release kinetics and composition may increase distance osteogenesis.
Keywords: adjacent bone formation, distance osteogenesis, intravital labeling, ncSiO2HA-coating, secondary stability, surface modification