We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 25 (2010), No. 3     15. May 2010
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 25 (2010), No. 3  (15.05.2010)

Page 473-481, PubMed:20556245


The Effects of Different Loading Times on the Bone Response Around Dental Implants: A Histomorphometric Study in Dogs
Jayme, Sérgio Jorge / De Oliveira, Rafael Ramos / Muglia, Valdir Antonio / Novaes jr., Arthur Belém / Ribeiro, Ricardo Faria
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate, through histomorphometric analysis, the effect that different loading times would have on the bone response around implants.
Materials and Methods: Three Replace Select implants were placed on each side of the mandible in eight dogs (n = 48 implants). One pair of implants was selected for an immediate loading protocol (IL). After 7 days, the second pair of implants received prostheses for an early loading protocol (EL). Fourteen days after implant placement, the third pair of implants received prostheses for advanced early loading (AEL). Following 12 weeks of prosthetics, counted following the positioning of the metallic crowns for the AEL group, the animals were sacrificed and the specimens were prepared for histomorphometric analysis. The differences between loading time in the following parameters were evaluated through analysis of variance: bone-to-implant contact, bone density, and crestal bone loss.
Results: The mean percentage of bone-to-implant contact for IL was 77.9% ± 1.71%, for EL it was 79.25% ± 2.11%, and for AEL it was 79.42% ± 1.49%. The mean percentage of bone density for IL was 69.97% ± 3.81%, for EL it was 69.23% ± 5.68%, and for AEL it was 69.19% ± 2.90%. Mean crestal bone loss was 1.57 ± 0.22 mm for IL, 1.23 ± 0.19 mm for EL, and 1.17 ± 0.32 mm for AEL. There was no statistical difference for any of the parameters evaluated (P > .05).
Conclusion: Different early loading times did not seem to significantly affect the bone response around dental implants.

Keywords: animal study, bone density, bone-to-implant contact, dental implants, early loading, immediate loading, osseointegration