Peri-implant bone response to orthodontic loading: Part 1. A histomorphometric study of the effects of implant surface design.
BACKGROUND
Bone response to orthodontic loading was compared histomorphometrically around 2 different types of osseointegrated implants (porous surfaced and machined threaded) to determine their suitability for orthodontic anchorage.


METHODS
Five beagles each received 3 implants of each design in contralateral mandibular locations. After a 6-week initial healing period, abutments were placed, and, 1 week later, the 2 mesial implants on each side were orthodontically loaded for 22 weeks. All implants remained osseointegrated throughout orthodontic loading except for 1 threaded implant that loosened. Light miscroscopy and back-scattered scanning electron microscopy were used to compare responses around the 2 implant designs.


RESULTS
Porous-surfaced implants had higher marginal bone levels (P +/- .025) and less relative implant displacement than threaded implants.


CONCLUSIONS
Differences in implant surface design can lead to differences in peri-implant bone height and bone-to-implant contact. Porous-surfaced implants might be successful as orthodontic anchorage units.
Oyonarte
Rodrigo
R
Orthodontics Program, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Pilliar
Robert M
RM
Deporter
Douglas
D
Woodside
Donald G
DG
D000539:Alveolar Process / Q000473:pathology / Q000503:physiopathology; D000818:Animals; D000044:Dental Abutments; D015921:Dental Implants; D017267:Dental Prosthesis Design; D019232:Dental Restoration Failure; D004285:Dogs; D008297:Male; D008334:Mandible / Q000473:pathology* / Q000503:physiopathology; D008855:Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; D016348:Osseointegration / Q000502:physiology; D010519:Periodontium / Q000473:pathology / Q000503:physiopathology; D016062:Porosity; D013314:Stress, Mechanical; D013499:Surface Properties; D014087:Tooth Movement Techniques / Q000295:instrumentation*
D015921:Dental Implants