Comparison of early osseointegration of SLA®and SLActive®implants in maxillary sinus augmentation: a pilot study.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the impact of a hydrophilic implant surface (SLActive®) placed into augmented maxillary sinuses on bone-to-implant contact (BIC) and surrounding tissue composition when compared to a hydrophobic surface (SLA®).


METHODS
Four sheep underwent bilateral sinus augmentation. Each sinus received anorganic bovine bone mineral + autogenous bone (ABBM + AB). Sixteen implants were subsequently placed 12 weeks postgrafting with each sinus receiving a control (SLA®) and test implant (SLActive®). Two animals were sacrificed at 2 weeks and another two animals were sacrificed at 4 weeks postimplantation. The eight sinuses and 16 implants were processed for histomorphometry, which assessed bone-to-implant contact (%BIC) and tissue elements (woven bone - WB, lamellar bone - LB, soft tissue - ST) in the interthread region of implants within the augmented sinus.


RESULTS
There was a statistically significant increase in %BIC at week 4 compared to the week 2 animals in both test (P < 0.005) and control (P < 0.005) groups. There was a statistically significant greater %BIC around test implants when compared to control implants in both week 2 (P < 0.05) and week 4 animals (P < 0.05). Greater %WB (11.17% ±6.82) and %LB (11.06% ±3.67) were seen in the test implants when compared to the control implants independent of time. This was only statistically significant for %LB (P < 0.05). A statistically significant reduction of 16.78% (±6.19) in %ST was noted in test implants when compared to control implants (P < 0.05) independent of time.


CONCLUSIONS
Both time and the use of hydrophilic implant surface had a positive impact on %BIC around implants placed into augmented maxillary sinuses. Hydrophilic implant surfaces also had a positive impact on surrounding tissue composition. Larger trials are needed to better assess and detect differences between these two surfaces in augmented maxillary sinuses.
School of Dentistry and Oral Health, Centre for Medicine and Oral Health, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Southport, Australia.
Jamil
J
Alayan
Institute for Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, Australia.
Cedryck
C
Vaquette
Institute for Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, Australia.
Siamak
S
Saifzadeh
Institute for Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, Australia.
Dietmar
D
Hutmacher
School of Dentistry and Oral Health, Centre for Medicine and Oral Health, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Southport, Australia.
Saso
S
Ivanovski
D000818:Animals; D000069343:Bone-Implant Interface / Q000473:pathology; D002417:Cattle; D003758:Dental Implantation, Endosseous / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D015921:Dental Implants; D016348:Osseointegration; D010865:Pilot Projects; D012756:Sheep; D059546:Sinus Floor Augmentation / Q000379:methods*
D015921:Dental Implants
animal model; bone grafting; bone regeneration; bone substitute; dental implant; histomorphometry; maxillary sinus augmentation