Effect of modifications of dual acid-etched implant surfaces on peri-implant bone formation. Part I: organic coatings.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of the present study was to test the hypothesis that peri-implant bone formation can be improved by modifying dual acid-etched (DAE) implant surfaces using organic coatings that enhance cell adhesion and osteogenic differentiation.


METHODS
Ten adult female foxhounds received experimental titanium implants in the mandible 3 months after removal of all premolar teeth. Six types of implants were evaluated in each animal: (i) implants with a machined surface (MS), (ii) implants with a DAE surface topography, (iii) implants with an acid-etched surface coated with RGD peptides, (iv) implants with an acid-etched surface coated with collagen I, (v) implants with an acid-etched surface coated with collagen I and chondroitin sulphate (CS), (vi) implants with an acid-etched surface coated with collagen I and CS and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2. Peri-implant bone regeneration was assessed by histomorphometry after 1 and 3 months in five dogs each by measuring bone implant contact (BIC) and the bone volume density (BVD) of the newly formed peri-implant bone.


RESULTS
After 1 month, mean BIC was significantly higher in the coated implants group than in the MS group. There was no significant difference when mean BIC in the DAE group was compared with implants with any of the organic coatings, but the difference was significant when compared with the MS implants. Differences in mean BVD value did not reach significance between any of the surfaces. After 3 months, the same held true for the mean BIC of all the groups except for Coll I. Mean volume density of the newly formed bone was higher in all the surface modifications, albeit without statistical significance.


CONCLUSIONS
It is concluded that with the exception of Coll I, the tested organic surface coatings on DAE surfaces did not improve peri-implant bone formation when compared with the DAE surfaces but enhanced BIC when compared with the MSs.
Schliephake
H
H
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, George-Augusta-University, Göttingen, Germany. schliephake.henning@med.uni-goettingen.de
Aref
A
A
Scharnweber
D
D
Bierbaum
S
S
Sewing
A
A
D000134:Acid Etching, Dental; D000818:Animals; D015519:Bone Density; D055396:Bone Morphogenetic Protein 2; D019485:Bone Morphogenetic Proteins / Q000494:pharmacology; D002448:Cell Adhesion; D002809:Chondroitin Sulfates / Q000494:pharmacology*; D020099:Coated Materials, Biocompatible; D024042:Collagen Type I / Q000494:pharmacology*; D015921:Dental Implants; D004285:Dogs; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D020007:Implants, Experimental; D009842:Oligopeptides / Q000494:pharmacology; D016348:Osseointegration / Q000187:drug effects*; D011994:Recombinant Proteins / Q000494:pharmacology; D013499:Surface Properties; D013997:Time Factors; D014025:Titanium; D016212:Transforming Growth Factor beta / Q000494:pharmacology
D055396:Bone Morphogenetic Protein 2; D019485:Bone Morphogenetic Proteins; D020099:Coated Materials, Biocompatible; D024042:Collagen Type I; D015921:Dental Implants; D009842:Oligopeptides; D011994:Recombinant Proteins; D016212:Transforming Growth Factor beta; C499469:recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2; C047981:arginyl-glycyl-aspartic acid; D002809:Chondroitin Sulfates; D014025:Titanium